Innovative Techniques for Reaching Out to Migrant

Youth ProjectContract number: 2016-2- ES02-KA205- 008204

FINAL STATE OF THE ART REPORT ON THE OB-STACLES FOR YOUTH WORK WITH MIGRANTS

`1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3FINAL STATE OF THE ART REPORT/SUMMARY OF RESULTS……………………………4ANNEX I_NATIONAL REPORT SPAIN………………………………………………………...7ANNEX II_NATIONAL REPORT GREECE…………………………………………………...19ANNEX III_NATIONAL REPORT UNITED KINGDOM……………………………………..26 ANNEX IV_NATIONAL REPORT BULGARIA……………………………………………….40ANNEX V_NATIONAL REPORT ITALY……………………………………………………...66

`2

INTRODUCTION

“M.Yth.WORK” project aims to provide innovative techniques for youth workers attempting to reach out and engage with young migrants/asylum seekers/refugees experiencing socio-economic obstacles and marginalisation. A core priority of the project is the educational integration of these young people, in the context of social inclusion and training to enhance life opportunities.

In order to achieve the aforementioned aim “M.Yth.WORK” project developed the State of the

art report on the obstacles for youth work with migrants (Intellectual Output 1) as one of the

Open Educational Resources of the Project.

The State of the art report provides a clear understanding, at national and European level, about:

-Needs of youth workers when working with young migrants, refugees and asylum seekers.

-Needs of migrants groups in the partner countries.

-Information concerning the obstacles that youth workers face in the process of reaching out mi-

grant youth.

-Information concerning the methods used by youth workers in order to reach out migrant youth.

National Reports process the information gathered by means of the different research activities

developed by project’s consortium:

1. National desk research: Carried out in all partner countries.2. Interviews: 10 Semi-structured interviews conducted by each partner organization, addressed to youth workers working with youth of migrant background as well as with young asylum seekers and refugees.

The aim of National Report’s summative analysis is to offer clear and useful information in order to a) provide inputs for State of the art report b) guide the development of project products and c) offer guidance to necessary adjustments and adaptations to the respective national realities.

The previously described thematic schemes have been subjected into thorough examination by national participants of “M.Yth.WORK” project and very interesting conclusions have been outlined.

`3

FINAL STATE OF THE ART REPORT

All involved countries are dealing with the issue of great waves of migration from differ-ent countries and ethnicities. The origins of young migrants may differ between the participating countries, but all of them are being challenged by the issue of successful integration of them. Language barrier consist one of the main and most reported obstacles young migrants are facing in their new host country. Language obstacle also prevents youngsters from validating prior learning and working experience delaying youngsters’ integration process and their labor inclu-sion. Legal and practical issues are also on the top of the list with the difficulties youngsters are facing when residing in their new country. As mentioned through interviews, there is a great luck of information and difficulty in access to information by youngster. Most of the time, youngsters do not have the knowledge regarding their basic rights. There is also a lack of representation from their community or at least a mediator counselor from their community who will facilitate their connection and communication with the appropriate services. Necessary arrangements take time to be handled, resulting to a delay of the start of their integration process, since they usually have one foot in the culture and life of the host country and the other one to their country of ori-gin. One more obstacle which was mentioned through all of the National Reports refers to the low educational level young migrants are dealing with, since local schools system is usually not prepared to receive and integrate them and consequently to serve their diversity needs. In many countries of the partnership, it was mentioned that official educational systems is not oriented to encourage integration, but in the contrary it is sadly creating and sustaining the difficulties young migrants are facing towards integration to the local community. Poor living conditions and the previously mentioned legal issues, prevent them from participating actively not only in the politi-cal but also social agenda and social life. Furthermore, taking into consideration the economic crisis all involved countries are facing, it has been noted a deterioration of public policies and plans for social and labor inclusion of young migrants. Moreover, stereotypes and discriminative behaviors are amongst the most prevailing difficulties young migrants are facing when entering or residing in a different country than their country and culture of origin. Phenomena of xeno-phobia and racism from the part of the majority and limited opportunities consist two of the most important factors which prevent the migrants from integrate successfully and also abstain from social reality.Additionally, adherence in religion related issues and hesitation which often refers to a fear stem-ming from the possible rejection from group of origin, are also factors that stand in the way of a successful integration and their isolation from the population of country of residence. Finally, lack of opportunities, due to the fact that many of youngsters migrants are living in hosting units, lead them to be unable to excel in their independency and sustain their isolation from the locals.

As far as the most common difficulty, youth workers are facing when working with migrants or towards their effort to approach them, has to do with the communication barrier. Language is deemed the most prevailed barrier between professionals and young migrants since it has been noticed that in the majority of the countries there is a lack of available interpreters who could assist and facilitate the work of professionals. The lack of knowledge of local language is related to labor market performance too, making youngsters’ residence even more challenging. Furthermore, lack of cultural and religious diversity knowledge is rated between the most common barriers professionals are facing and need improvement. Intercultural

`4

communication skills and generally intercultural competences are deemed really crucial for professionals to develop in order to serve efficiently youngsters. One more challenge youth workers are often facing when working with young migrants, has to do with the consequences, traumatic experiences of youngsters are generating. Some of the results of their negative experiences and trauma are fear, lack of trust and therefore hesitation and suspicion towards activities and actions which target youngsters’ participation and mobilization. It has been frequently reported tentative attitude with regard to unknown words and concepts and interactive activities seem weird to them as well as concepts such as volunteerism. Moreover, professionals, mentioned that the different upraising of young migrants also gets in the way of working with them, since concepts like education and discipline were imposed by different means and in a more domineering way. For example, commitment is challenging especially with population like Roma (early school leaving and marriage at early ages) who are following community traditions. The mentioned above facts, lead them to be introvert and the building of trust really challenging. In addition, identity work is also important for all young people. Many of these young migrants are used to leading very adult lives, often working to support their families since a young age. This is in stark comparison to those of the same age in the Western countries, where they are considered children to be ‘protected’ under safeguarding/child protection legislation.The majority of professionals, reported difficulty in engaging youngsters in activities and great need for learning methods which could assist them to enhance the motivation of them. Through the research activities from all partner organizations it is quite obvious and extremely common in every country that youth workers are being invited to successfully tackle and finally overcome discrimination and prejudices which are surrounding migrants. Therefore professionals are being invited to increase and expand their actions regarding diversity awareness raising within the local community and handle demanding and sometimes aggressive behaviors and attitudes towards them or their beneficiaries. Finally the majority of our research activities’ sample described a rather challenging situation regarding the approach of youngster migrants. First of all, according to the majority of our sample, the reality is that professionals are those who are usually approaching youngsters and not the opposite. Based on the findings stemming from all National Reports the majority of youth workers strongly believe in the non-formal education as a means for approaching young migrants, since it overcomes the barriers of language and educational level, highlighting though, the importance of limiting the activities taking place inside the host structures or only between the same population and stress the importance of integrating such activities in the local community in order to provide young migrants to successfully socialize with local peers.

National Reports indicated a need of youth workers to participate in more training opportunities than the existing ones. Professionals, expressed their need for updating their knowledge regarding integration process and in particular in acquiring techniques and methods which have to do with motivation and mobilization of youngsters towards a more active participation in local social life. Professionals, wish to learn more about art based techniques when working with groups of young migrants. Moreover, professionals wish to learn ways in order to integrate sports into the process of approaching and working with their beneficiaries. Furthermore, youth workers are also interested in using the effective strategy of peer to peer learning, which is reported to be really successful when used with young migrants. ICT tools and the good usage of them, regards, one different side of new knowledge youth workers wish to acquire and develop. Finally knowledge and information regarding opportunities of youngsters and their rights, was another point that our sample highlighted.

`5

In a nutshell, lots of good practices have been described but most examples of good prac-tice were found to be at project level and there is a great need to that work to be developed more. Activities which engage both professional and beneficiary as a team, are considered as helpful as well as events and visits that take place outside of the narrow frameworks of their community or hosting unit, such as visit museum, cinema, café etc. Finally, connection and opportunities for education i.e. studies in university as well as development of non-formal groups of young mi-grants, can also assist in their successful integration in the local community. Thought needs to be given as to how relationships between Youth Services and the refugee community sector can be developed. The over-arching recommendation is that an appropriate and relevant youth work provision for refugee communities’ needs to be developed and a cooperation between formal and non-formal learning institutions to be established.

`6

Innovative Techniques for Reaching Out to Migrant Youth Project

Contract number: 2016-2- ES02-KA205- 008204

NATIONAL DESK RESEARCH

- SPAIN-

for Intellectual Output 1:State of the art report on the Obstacles for Youth Work with Migrants

`7

DESK RESEARCH

DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT NATIONAL SITUATION

The reality of young migrants in Spain is very heterogeneous. The motivation to migrate from their countries of origin is diverse: perception of higher social promotion and job opportunities in Spain, the need of changing their context and personal situation, following their relatives and acquaintances same migratory process, etc.

According to the Statistics National Institute (INE), the number of migrant people registered in the census is 4.418.898 (January 2016).In the following table we have the number of young migrants:

RANGE OF AGE

MIGRANT POPULATION

15 – 19 2.185.06720 – 24 2.280.07425 -29 2.562.88130 -34 3.098.744

Migrant population is concentrated in areas with high economic movement, because that's where labour is most needed, such as the Autonomous Communities of Madrid, Catalonia, Andalusia, Valencia and Murcia. On the other hand, EU citizens are mostly located in Levante, Andalusia, Catalonia, Balearic and Canary islands, because of the soft weather.In Madrid and Catalonia, Latin-American and African migrants are predominant (including Maghreb). Moroccans are the largest colony in Catalonia and Andalusia, and three quarter of all Pakistanis in the country is in Catalonia. The most representative population from immigrant origin in Madrid (region) comes from: Rumania, Morocco, Ecuador, China, Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Bulgaria and Dominican Republic.

Young migrants occupy different socially constituted position according to their legal situation (it predetermines their possibility of working, the way they arrive to Spain - family regrouping or arrival by themselves), length of stay in Spain with certain legal and work stability (they start to build a place in Spain and quit the idea of return).

In addition, young migrants are facing different difficulties in Spain. First of all, the legal

`8

situation. A young migrant "without legal documents - permission" is, in short, a person which has been condemned administratively to social marginalization. Only family or friends support networks allow the implications of this exclusion.In other hand there are young migrants who have work permits-legal documents but have not contributed to the public system enough so they lose their residence and work permit, they cannot renew them in many cases and they become undocumented again.

Concerning to education and training, there are young migrants who leave the school system after finishing compulsory education to join the labor market immediately so they present a low educational level. They also have to face to lack or difficulty to standardize their degrees, bureaucracy to make approvals to their studies, preventing them from professional development, recognition of qualifications and recognition of work experience in the country, does that often are unable to identify the competencies or skills they possess. In some cases language management is a factor of exclusion.

Besides its complexity, young unemployment migrants has a strong inequality aspect: numbers of young migrants people Not in Employment, Education or Training (NEETs) are increasing across Spain. This is strongly connected to their limited access to education & training opportunities, due to original disparities of social and educational capital, in the case of women the situation is worse.Lack of professional experience, mismatch between available skills and skills required in the labor market have been pointed out as factors affecting the growing numbers of youth unemployment migrants in Spain as well (generating many cases of frustration, exclusion, depression and anxiety)

Other aspects that make more difficult the integration of young migrants are discrimination on ethnic origin, nationality or religion, concentration in certain neighborhoods associated with situations of socioeconomic precariousness and with smaller social, educational, cultural or leisure facilities. Problems of coexistence derived from competition for public spaces. Emergence of youth gangs with bad habits. Lack of participation of young migrants in the political and social agenda, etc.

To tackle these aspects there is a strong need for high-quality youth work, connected to inclusion of young migrants people with fewer opportunities.The economic crisis in Spain and Europe has undoubtedly been a factor in the deterioration and reduction of public policies, resources and plans for the social and labor inclusion of young migrants, even from the public, professional and institutional workers themselves.At national level there are Strategic Plans addressed to the integration of migrant people and with some actions in the area of youth. At regional level there are also strategic plans where local organizations can participate.

`9

GOOD PRACTICES Criteria for the identification of Good Practices:

Effective and successful: A “good practice” has proven its strategic relevance as the most effective way in achieving a specific objective; it has been successfully adopted and has had a positive impact on in-dividuals and/or communities.

Environmentally, economically and socially sustainable: A “good practice” meets current needs, in particular the essential needs of the world’s poorest, without compromising the ability to address future needs.

Gender sensitive: A description of the practice must show how actors, men and women, involved in the process, were able to improve their livelihoods and how the technique has an impact on the eradication / reduction of gender inequalities.

Technically feasible: Technical feasibility is the basis of a “good practice”. It is easy to learn and to implement.

Inherently participatory: Participatory approaches are essential as they support a joint sense of ownership of deci-sions and actions.

Replicable and adaptable: A “good practice” should have the potential for replication and should therefore be adapt-able to similar objectives in varying situations.

→ Tamunt Project: Youth, sense of belonging and cultural identity

Who is implementing it? ACISI (Association for Cooperation, Social Inclusion and Interculturality) Target audience: Youngsters at risk of social exclusion and identity crisis with an immigrant background, especially those from second and third generation. Thematic and intervention areas for community action: Intercultural education, Gender Equality and Social Inclusion, Participation, Intercultural Coexistence, Intercultural Mediation, Combating racism and xenophobia, Community Development, Cultural Actions, Art and

`10

Creativity, Sports, Leisure and free time, Psychosocial support.

General description: The Tamunt project1 reaches out to young people aged 16 to 25 years with an immigrant background promoting through the community psychosocial intervention, their personal and social transformation in the field of identity, sense of belonging, coexistence and participation. Tamunt aims to improve their emotional and relational health as well as the expectations of school and formative success.

Lines of Intervention: A. Personal transformation through mountain sports and climbing with young people with an immigrant background from 16 to 25 years who are currently out of the circuit of schooling, with no expectations in the labour market and that are not attended by any care service. These activities are tools used to work on physical, emotional and affective health, as well as strengthen of group cohesion through mutual support and personal growth (self-esteem and self-improvement), reflection and dialogue. B. Intercultural preventive intervention in the field of formal education, with young people through theater techniques, intercultural mediation and appreciative dialogues as tools to enable the individual and collective management of the emotional and affective health of the youngsters, the management of conflicts in the classroom and the challenges for a successful school experience.C. Dynamization of community participation in the neighborhood and the city targeting youngsters from 14-25 years. Within the framework of activities of the city’s associations and the municipality, Tamunt facilitates the space for the communitarian participation in the Socio-educational Intervention Program 6-162.

Methodology: The project uses methodological elements based on a concept of non-directive education, which encourages active participation and the discovery of positive attitudes and val-ues. The motivation is also boosted from the trust built with the educator, in an interactive process in which throughout taking into account expectations, suggestions and initiatives of the youngsters their implication is ensured in all the phases of the project. From Tamunt they work methodologically from three levels of action: individual level, where basically they use the tech-niques of social and educational accompaniment and individual empowerment; Group level, where they use group dynamics techniques; and Group Empowerment at a community level

1 Tamunt has been selected as a good practice by the Fundació Carulla, Fundació Migra Studium and the Department of Employment, Social Affairs and Family of the Catalan Government.

2 P6-16: Socioeducative action program created by the Municipality of Tortosa directed to children and young people between 6 and 16 years and their families. For more information: http://bit.ly/2lnlWZ2

`11

Mountain sports as an innovative technique to reach out to young migrants.

where they implement and create models of intervention in the community where the individual and the group influences the community and vice versa.

Innovative elements: Its uniqueness in terms of methodological application based in a triple strategic line of intervention; The content and methodology are adapted to the needs and characteristics of the beneficiaries;It promotes and articulates the participation of all the agents involved in the improvement of the community and territory;It focuses on a specific newly target topic: management of the identity crisis of second- or third- immigrant generation youngsters. It enhances the visibility of the project and the exchanges into other territories. To learn more: http://bit.ly/2jUQ1dh

→ Mentoring for young immigrants and refugees

Who is implementing it? The Coordinator of Social Mentoring- Reference Point Association.Target audience: Young immigrants and refugees in risk of social exclusion. Thematic and intervention areas for community action: Intercultural education; Participation; Intercultural Mediation; Community development; Health promotion; Innovative design of local policies; Sports, Leisure and free time; Promotion of associationism; Training; Gender equality and social inclusion; Intercultural Coexistence; Combating racism and xenophobia; Intergenerational Dialogue; Religions and Interreligious Dialogue; Cultural actions, art and creativity; Volunteering.Line of intervention: A total of 2,515 children and young people between the ages of 8 and 23 have participated in a mentoring program of the Association, and 2,601 adults and young people over the age of 25 years old have been mentors. Reference Point Association is responsible of the following Program3:

Program aimed at youngsters that are – or who were formerly - under the care of the Administration: Voluntary accompaniment programs that offer young people a volunteer who gives support in their daily life, both in terms of practical and emotional issues. A ratio of 1 young + 1 adult is established. The actions that entail this accompaniment are defined by the youngster and agreed with the volunteer/mentor.

Methodology: The social mentoring entails an improvement for the personal development of young people who come from vulnerable environments in key aspects such as school performance, contact with the labour market and improvement in emotional aspects. This personal accompaniment between the mentor and the youngster creates a relationship of trust

3 The project has been selected as a good practice by the Fundació Carulla, the Barcelona City Council and the Department of Employment, Social Affairs and Family of the Catalan Government.

`12

between both that increases the expectations and the self-esteem of the mentoree. The mentoring methodology of this project includes the following steps: Mentoring Design (Establish outcomes/goals· Define roles· Determine internal processes· Customize communication plan · Customize mentor training); Mentoring Implementation (· Choose mentor(s) · Communicate· Train mentors) and Mentoring Evaluation (Assess mentoring effectiveness).

Innovative elements: Generates a constructive process; Strengthen the integral development of beneficiaries at diverse levels; It benefits not only those who receive accompaniment but also those who act as mentors, as they develop skills that can be transferred to their personal lives; It generates institutional and community benefits; It generates a resource that serves as a bridge to transition periods such as the access to compulsory secondary education or high school; It manages cultural diversity; It generates a real alternative and close to the needs of young people; It helps young people better understand the environment around them; It helps young people in their aspirations and in developing personal projects.

To learn more: http://bit.ly/2kOmG8C

CONCLUSIONS

In order youth work can approach with success the complex situation of social exclusion suffered specifically in the case of youngsters with an immigrant background and design effective remedies, it is key to understand and have the tools to intervene in the intersection of the various exclusionary determinants and the effects of exclusion that result from them.In Spain, the main aspects of social exclusion can be summarized as follows, although the list is not exhaustive:

Experiencing discrimination (chronic and repetitive experiences) suffering from an emotional and psychological sense of exclusion and isolation from the community and/or from society;

Experiencing poor living conditions (in terms of housing, nutrition, clothing, physical safety);

Early school leaving and barriers to accessing affordable, quality education and training; Lack of residency, legal status, or permanent address; Being unable to participate in the social and political life of one’s community (not out of

choice but as a result of obstacles encountered); Being unable to enjoy cultural and recreational activities (as a result of obstacles

encountered); Suffering from health conditions deriving from poor living standards and experiencing

obstacles to accessing health care and social services when needed.

Therefore, in order to effectively prevent and remedy the risk of exclusion for many of these youngsters, the determinants that generate social inequalities need to be redressed. Lessons

`13

learned from the tradition of youth work in our country and at a European level indicate that this is possible and need to be done: Boosting education and training based on individualized and flexible models, offering opportunities for labour inclusion, fighting discriminatory practices, designing actions not tied to formal citizenship/residence requirements and boosting the agency of the beneficiaries, are powerful intervention lines of action for social inclusion. At the same time, in it is also key to boost targeted and comprehensive political actions in order to offer an appropriate framework.

SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS

SSF and ABD have conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with youth workers working with young migrants in order to obtain data that is untraceable though desk research and quantitative methods. The interviewed where 10 women and 10 men, most of them with 8 to 12 years work-ing with young migrants both in the private and the public sector. As follows, the key ideas and conclusions learned from the interviews are detailed:

I. According to the interviews, the main challenges/obstacles highlighted by the youth work-ers when reaching out to young migrants can be enlisted in the following points: Language. Youth workers face difficulties to overcome the language barriers, key to promote a smooth communication, hence comprehension between the parts. In particular those working in reception centers have highlighted due to low resources there are no translators during the first reception processes, this is an obstacle as this moment is key to understand the necessities of mi-nors and to address properly their situation. Lack of cultural and religious diversity knowledge. In general workers have low knowledge on the specificities of other cultures and the related religious rites as well as intercultural compe-tences. This reduces the quality of their work and the bonding they create with the youngsters. In order to speed and support the integration processes of foreign teenagers youth workers need to acquire this knowledge through lifelong learning trainings. Inequality of opportunities. Many have specified young immigrants find structural inequali-ties to access to information, resources, education, health services, training and labour opportuni-ties. This represents a huge obstacle to their self-development and impedes youth workers can offer a sustainable way out of teen’s vulnerable situations. Lack of resources. Youth workers have also pointed that the material resources they possess when working with young immigrants are often of low quality. In many cases they cannot use material that has been selected as a best practice in boosting social integration because it is not translated to other languages. Linked to the second obstacle, workers demand material that ac-knowledge and works on cultural and religious diversity, resilience after a migration process, etc. Irregular administrative situation. Especially young immigrants that arrive to Spain after 13 years old or those that arrive as unaccompanied minors find several obstacles to regularize their administrative situation. Hence, it is difficult for youth workers to offer a quality monitoring throughout time. Furthermore, those minors that have 16-17 years old and are not regularized generally disappear from the protection services and the activities offered by youth workers as they are afraid to be detained and refouled to their origin country.

`14

Obstacles in validating prior learning and working experience. These obstacles delay the integration process of youngsters and their labour inclusion. As a consequence youth workers find it harder to motivate them. To provide them with well-being and resilience. The interviewed have also highlighted there are few programs to provide with emotional and psychological support for those youngsters who need it because of identity problems and confusion in identification and belonging feelings, self-esteem and self-concept needs, social skills, etc. There is a special need of programs that tackle the mismatch of expectations between the migratory process idea (or their parents one) and the reality, as well as services that bring closer the way of understand native and origin traditions be-tween different generations of immigrants. Lack of professional mediators. Youth workers miss the figure of professional mediators that can work in the parents and their sons/daughters relationships. In many cases youngsters have not seen their parents (mother in most cases) for a long time until they have been granted with family reunification. As can be expected, to rebuild a family bond in this context it is compli-cated. Also, when youngsters arrive to Spain before 10 years old in most cases when they reach the adolescence they have developed an identity (influenced by the origin country context) that differs a lot from their parent’s identity, it is very important that in these situations professional mediators can intercede in order to prevent the escalation of the conflict. To tackle the discrimination and prejudices surrounding young migrants. There is still a lot of work to do in raise awareness in the society about the hard situation faced by these teenagers with the aim to destroy prejudices and discrimination affecting them. Excessive rigidity of the protection system. In order to prevent their disappearance of the system, there is a need to adapt it to the youngsters’ necessities, not pretend the opposite. Hence it is urgent to improve the assistance system and implement a Human Rights and Children Pro-tection approach in order to empower young migrants. It is important to note Spain is one of the European countries with a higher rate in minors that exit the protection system which clearly un-dermines their fundamental rights and puts them in situations of extreme social risk4. Lack of non-formal interaction spaces. Youth workers have highlighted more non-formal spaces should be granted in order to develop activities with young migrants. According to their experience to succeed, there is a need to mix formal and non-formal interaction spaces in order to boost the teens’ integration process and their self-development. Furthermore the creation of this spaces or working approaches would help reaching out young migrants in their day a day re-lationship and interaction spaces. Insufficiency in network and cooperation among the entities working with young mi-grants. The interviewed pointed the necessity to improve the communication among entities working in this field as in diverse cases they have encountered that a teenager has done the same program twice, etc. This decreases teenager’s motivation and it is not efficient. Also, most of the workers have pointed out the necessity to observe and apply different approaches and experi-ences from other international projects.

4 Save the Children (2016) Report Infancias invisibles, available at: https://www.savethechildren.es/sites/default/files/imce/docs/infancias-invisibles-ninos-migrantes-refugiados-trata-save-the-children.pdf

II. According to the interviews, the non-formal education methodology is considered by youth workers as a crucial approach in order to reach out and work with young migrants. In general

`15

they have agreed it is one of the best approximations as it helps teenagers to increase their sense of belonging and to make new ties with new people in leisure/open spaces. Also, youth workers see the flexibility non-formal spaces offer as a strong positive factor. However all of them have insisted in the importance to combine both formal and non-formal spaces. In this sense, until non-formal educa-tion receives more recognition, formal education is the only way for these youngsters to obtain a cer-tificate, essential to reach their social and economic integration. The requirements of youth workers in order to develop this approach can be summarized in the fol-lowing points: Lack of activities based in peer learning methodology. Even though this methodology has been recognized by several actors and experts as a best practice when working with collectives at risk and specially when working with youngsters, it has not been widespread among the activities addressed to them. Youth workers also pointed out this methodology boosts the figure of “reference young-sters”: young migrants that are a role model and empower other youngsters so they can improve their quality of living. Strengthen the use of sport, art, theatre, ICT tools, etc. in order to reach young migrants. Non-formal spaces can be very enriching and useful as they are more flexible than formal ones. Plus, these techniques can overcome the language barrier. Use of public facilities. In order to involve all the community and boost a communitarian action, services working with young migrants should use public facilities to develop non-formal activities at the same time that reach and raise-awareness among the entire neighborhood. Training for youth workers. The interviewed have recognized normally it is harder to work in non-formal spaces than in formal one, precisely because of its flexibility. In this sense, they agreed there is a need to train professionals that are expert in conduct this kind of activities following the peer-to-peer methodology.

Fragments from youth workers’ answers that you think important for project objectives “Language barrier and in many cases the precarious employment of families make very difficult that young migrants come to our service” “The key of our work is to understand that we are not only social workers that offer counseling and grants, we are professionals that work with people, and thus our main aim is their personal and psy-chological development”. “It is easy to reach out young migrants by acceding to their relationship spaces. The difficulty is staying at this space in order of not establishing relationships where they look for getting something (material) from us and we expect to have a relationship based in our own values and culture”. “Empathy, calmness and sense of humor are needed to support and to provide confidence to young people” “We work with a very vulnerable profile. It is very difficult to create a strong bonding as youngsters have urgent primary necessities to cover. There is a need to offer a holistic intervention in order to properly support them. Also, within the holistic intervention I understand it is included to raise awareness among society with the aim to fight the prejudices affecting young migrants.” “Often youngsters tell me: people always say we (referring to Moroccan teenagers) are a ghetto but then, when I have been in spaces where normally I do not go I can feel they see me as a stranger in there”. “These youngsters do not only encounter difficulties in the origin society, they also have to face ob-stacles within their own family: in general the necessities of sons and daughters are diverse to their parent’s ones as they live diverse migratory processes.”

`16

“We need youth workers from different nationalities and with different backgrounds! It is so useful when within their own collectives they can transmit messages to reach out to youngsters. The excep-tional figure would be communitarian referents, trained youngsters that train other youngsters.” “I think youth workers need more knowledge about other cultures, I talk about this a lot with my col -leagues. The other day I was in the Reception Centre and I knew a girl was doing the Ramadan (out of time). When I saw her I asked her how was it going and she did not answer me and hide her head. I did not understand why she did that, until she told me later: before, while we were talking, next to use there was the gatekeeper of the centre (he was a man). Because of this she did not explained me about the Ramadan. She was doing it out of time because last July when everybody did it, during one week she had her period hence, she had to recover this week in another month. This fact was shame-ful for her, because of this she did not want anyone to know, especially men. After this experience I felt I needed to learn more about the Islam."

REFERENCES AND USEFUL LINKS

Academic sources

- Bhabha, J. (2014), Child Migration & Human Rights in a Global Age. - Cabedo, V.J. (2008) La protección e integración de los menores inmigrantes no acompañados

en España, Cuadernos constitucionales de la Cátedra Fadrique Furió Ceriol, ISSN 1133-7087, Nº 56, 2006, pp. 81-95.

- Alonso A. (2008), En terra de ningú, Grup de Recerca IFAM.- -Aparicio R., Portes A. (2014), Crecer en España: la integración de los hijos de inmigrantes,

Colección Estudios Sociales de la Caixa, núm. 38. - Pedreño, A.; Hernández, M. (2005.). La condición de inmigrante. Exploraciones e investiga-

ciones desde la Región de Murcia. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, 2005

Reports

- Youth Social Exclusion and Lessons from Youth Work, EACEA, http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/youth/tools/documents/social_exclusion_and_youth_work.pdf

- Cedefop, 2010. Guiding at-risk youth through learning to work. Lessons from across Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

- Análisis de las necesidades de Formación Jovenes Migrantes en Europa, Foundation for work, 2012, available at: http://www.foundationsforwork.eu/es/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/An%C3%A1lisis-de-las-Necesidades-de-Formaci%C3%B3n-J%C3%B3venes-Migrantes-en-Europa.pdf

- UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), A Framework for the Protection of Children, 26 June 2012, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4fe875682.html

`17

- Save the Children (2016) Report Infancias invisibles, available at: https://www.savethechildren.es/sites/default/files/imce/docs/infancias-invisibles-ninos-migrantes-refugiados-trata-save-the-children.pdf

Useful links

- Web Page of The Coordinator of Social Mentoring: http://mentoriasocial.org/es/- Web Page of ACISI: http://cepaim.org/tag/acisi/- Web Page of Reference Point Association: http://www.puntdereferencia.org/- Spanish Statistical Office (INE), available at: http://www.ine.es/

`18

Innovative Techniques for Reaching Out to Migrant Youth Project

Contract number: 2016-2- ES02-KA205- 008204

NATIONAL DESK RESEARCH

- GREECE-

for Intellectual Output 1:State of the art report on the Obstacles for Youth Work with Migrants

`19

DESK RESEARCH

DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT NATIONAL SITUATION

According to 2011 census, Greece population reaches 10.815.197 people, out of them 9.903.268

have Greek citizenship, so around 91,6% of permanent population are Greeks. The main

officially recognized "minority" in Greece is the Muslim minority in Thrace, Northern

Greece, and mainly consists of Western Thrace Turks, Pomaks (both mainly inhabiting Western

Thrace), and also Romani, found particularly in central and Northern Greece. 

The most important peculiarity of migration in Greece is the extreme big osmosis between

Greeks and Albanians. Albanians live in Greece are about half million. Lately due to crisis

though large portion of the Albanian population, returned to their country. Taking into

consideration information from 2013, in the second place we find migrants coming from

Bulgaria and then Romania. Another immigration boom really hit following the fall of the

Soviet Union in 1989, More recent immigrant groups, with more recent political asylum and/or

illegal migration flows through Turkey of Afghans, Iranians, Iraqis, Somali and others. In 2015,

arrivals of refugees by sea have increased dramatically in Greece mainly due to the Syrian Civil

War. Human Rights Watch  reported a large number of children travelling alone to Greece; only

last year 1,100 were registered as unaccompanied or without family members. The real numbers

although are likely much higher as many children travelling alone claim to be 18 to avoid

prolonged detention.

In September 2016, the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) and Mercy Corps conducted a joint

assessment of the needs, vulnerabilities, protection risks and capacities of female and male

adolescent and youth refugees and migrants transiting through Greece. The goal of the

assessment was to depict the needs of the population and provide information about policy and

program design. In particular 17 focus group discussions (FGD) were conducted in Greece in

September 2016. Assessment covered a sampling of adolescents and youth (ages 14–25) who

live in Greek islands, in mainland camps, and in urban areas of Athens. A small number of young

people (ages 25–30) were also included in the discussions to gain their insights into the situation.

`20

In order representative sampling of all refugees and migrants, to be ensured, the assessment

included both male and female youth from Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Eritrea,

Burkina Faso, Mali, Cameroon, Nigeria, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

KEY THEMES YOUNG PEOPLE POINTED OUT DURING FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS:

1 Overwhelming interest in continuing education

2 A desire to engage in income-generating activities and willingness to learn new skills to meet

market demands

3 Disappointment and concern over lack of attentive, professional healthcare

4 Profound stress and decreased psychological well-being

5 Strong sense of care and concern for others

6 Desire for acceptance and connection, despite sense of discrimination

7 Disillusionment with human rights principles

8 Safety concerns and gender-based violence. Greece’s economic and great number of migrants

overwhelmed porous borders and overstretched services making migrants vulnerable to sexual

exploitation.

Finally, unfortunately, mapping of needs of professionals working with youth migrants is really

weak. This information though, indicates the lack of recorded information from reliable sources

and the importance of MythWork project through which, we will gain valuable input from youth

workers themselves.

GOOD PRACTICES

Project “Solidarity Network for young refugees and immigrants” aims at the development of a

support network between young refugees who are newcomers and young migrants and refugees

who are living in the country for years. The network focuses at topics social integration

(language, housing, leisure time) as a vital element for orientation.

“Cooperation towards the formulation of innovative social planning in view of preventing social

`21

exclusion among adolescent immigrants and refugees-Hermes” project’s goal is the promotion

and support of experiences and practices exchange, which have to do with: investigation of

reasons causing adolescents to leave school, recording of adolescents who are considering

leaving school, qualitative analysis of results and development of indicators of early school

leaving, evaluation of policies being followed by member states as well as of good practices

applied towards the treatment of the current situation, networking with NGO and Organization

working with refugees and immigrants, recording of suggestions regarding policy reform and

studying national projects towards social integration.

Sadly there are no further information whether those projects are still running and which their

results are. The need of mapping of good practices towards treatment and resolution of current

problematic is once again being highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

It is worth mentioned that there is a great lack of sources providing information about current situation in youth work field and therefore there is a limited knowledge regarding youth workers’ needs and requests. It wasn’t until recently when the Panhellenic Union of Youth Workers was created in order to assert youth workers’ rights. It is really important to highlight that in Greece there are no course of studies for Youth Workers. Youth workers have acquired their knowledge from seminars and studies abroad. There is a great need for a specific educational framework to be created in order youth workers in Greece to acquire scientific background and contribute to the successful work with youngsters. Finally, in Greece the profession of youth worker is not licensed and youth workers are working without a specific framework working rights.  In a nutshell, as it has emerged from the Desk Research a great need for mapping of professionals’ needs exists and therefore the implementation of such project in Greece deemed so important and necessary.

`22

SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS

A. Challenges in the work field Main conclusions

The majority of our sample described a rather challenging situation regarding the approach of youngster migrants. First of all, according to the majority of our sample, the reality is that professionals are those who are usually approaching youngsters and not the opposite. As mentioned through the interviews, there is a great luck of information and difficulty in access to information by youngster. Most of the time, youngsters do not have the knowledge regarding their basic rights. There is also a lack of representation from their community or at least a mediator counselor from their community who will facilitate their connection and communication with the appropriate services. Language also deemed as a great barrier as well as the lack of available interpreters. Moreover, the cultural background consists a barrier on its own. Stereotypes that they also carry are dysfunctional for a successful integration of them. There is hesitation with regard to unknown words and concepts and interactive activities seem weird to them as well as concepts such as volunteerism. Interviewees mentioned that the different upraising also gets in the way of working with youngsters since concepts like education and discipline were imposed by different means and in a more domineering way. For example, commitment is challenging especially with population like Roma (early school leaving and marriage at early ages) who are following community traditions. The mentioned above facts, lead them to be introvert and the building of trust really challenging. Finally, adherence in religion related issues and hesitation which often refers to a fear stemming from the possible rejection from group of origin, are also factors that stand in the way of a successful integration and their isolation from the population of country of residence. Finally, lack of opportunities, due to the fact that many of youngsters migrants are living in hosting units, lead them to be unable to excel in their independency and sustain their isolation from the locals. Xenophobia from the part of the majority and limited opportunities consist two of the most important factors which prevent the migrants from integrate successfully and also abstain from social reality.As far as good practices are concerned, which may help professionals when working with youngsters coming from diverse cultural background those mainly regard to the use of non-formal education, participatory and experiential activities, as well as participation in European projects and exchanges and international initiatives. Non-formal education seems to succeed to overcome the language barrier which it was mentioned from the majority of the interviews and main obstacle. Moreover, activities which engage both professional and beneficiary as a team, are also considered as helpful as well as events and visits that take place outside of the narrow frameworks of their community or hosting unit, such as visit museum, cinema, café etc. Finally, connection and opportunities for education i.e. studies in university as well as

`23

development of non-formal groups of young migrants, can also assist in their successful integration in the local community

B. Non-formal education methodology know-howMain conclusions

The majority of youth workers wish to learn more about art based techniques when working with groups of youngster migrants. Crisis management is another topic which interest them and also techniques which have to do with motivation and activation of youngsters towards a more active participation in local social life. Moreover professionals expressed their need for updating their knowledge regarding integration process. Another interesting topic had to do with more practical knowledge regarding the successful management of a project and the effective time planning of project’s actions as well as evaluation of running activities. Finally knowledge and information regarding opportunities of youngsters and their rights, was another point that our sample highlighted. The wish for every professional who participated in our interviews, regards their complaints about the non-existent legal framework which could describe, establish and define the profession of youth worker in Greece.Every interviewee believes strongly at the non-formal education as a means for approaching young migrants, since it overcomes the barriers of language and educational level, highlighting though, the importance of limiting the activities taking place inside the host structures or only between the same population and stress the importance of integrating such activities in the local community in order to provide young migrants to successfully socialize with local peers.According to interviewees’ opinion, an outstanding youth worker is that person who actively listens, participates, is constant updated regarding the needs of youngsters, is working with a specific age group, is aware of formal policies and trends, is networking with other professionals in order to exchange knowledge and practices/being extrovert/have the feeling of being part of a team, is someone empathic and patient, supportive without directing, someone who is flexible, an educator. The most common part in almost all of the interviews was the part that the most needed quality of the youth worker is the keeping the boundaries for the sake of not the temporary satisfaction of the youngster but for their long term benefit.

`24

REFERENCES AND LINKS

Mercy Corps and Norwegian Refugee Council (2016): Don't Forget Us: Voices of Young Refugees and Migrants in Greece."

“Μια ακτινογραφία του πληθυσμού της σημερινής Ελλάδας”, September 2013, Retrieved fromhttp://www.ethnos.gr/giorgos_delastik/arthro/mia_aktinografia_tou_plithys-mou_tis_simerinis_elladas-63888376/

“The tragedy of young migrants in austerity-hit Greece”, July 2015, Retrieved from https://newint.org/features/web-exclusive/2015/07/30/world-day-against-trafficking-mi-grants-austerity-greece/

“Immigration to Greece”, Retrieved from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immi-gration_to_Greece

`25

Innovative Techniques for Reaching Out to Migrant Youth Project

Contract number: 2016-2- ES02-KA205- 008204

NATIONAL DESK RESEARCH

- UK-

for Intellectual Output 1:State of the art report on the Obstacles for Youth Work with Migrants

`26

DESK RESEARCH

Profile of Migrants in the UK Of the estimated 8.6 million foreign-born people living in the UK in 2015 according to the Labour Force Survey, approximately 2.5 million were under the age of 30. The countries of ori-gin of young migrants broadly mirror those of the total migrant population, with Poland, India, Pakistan, Germany and Romania making up 5 of the top 6 countries of origin for both under 30’s and the foreign-born population as a whole (an exception is Ireland, which has declined in prominence as a country of origin and has a lower share of foreign-born people in the under-30s age bracket).

Migrants typically arrive in the UK when they are young. At the time of the 2011 Census, 83% of foreign-born people who had arrived in the previous year were under the age of 35 (ONS 2016). About half of recently arriving migrants in recent years have been under the age of 25, accord-ing to Migration Observatory analysis of the Labour Force Survey (Markaki, 2015).

It is difficult to generalise about young migrants as the population is extremely diverse, encom-passing children accompanying family members, international students in further or higher ed-ucation, and young people coming to work for varying durations. Because of the diversity of young migrants as a group, the issues they face and the policy questions they raise varies widely and takes many different forms.

The origination and persistence of social networks which allow for the hybridity, dynamism and extension of new kinds of identities, freedom of expression and identity experimentation is cru-cial to thinking about youth work with young refugees. Structurally this can be extremely prob-lematic where civil society, citizenship, leave to remain, and lack of access to education and lan-guage facilities are so restrictive and molecular, and where the only sources of social support can be the very ethnic and faith enclaves that young people can find so restrictive.

Language and identity can be the most challenging aspect of building new social networks in the UK. Kilbride et al in their study of young refugee experiences have argued that the very

`27

multi-dimensionality of young people’s needs create complex networks of dependence and so-cial isolation which often only enclaves can support – certainly professional youth work has to understand the process of identity formation and be ‘reflective of the integration they seek, not the marginalisation they neither want nor deserve,’ (2000:17).

Current PolicyIn 2012 the then UK Coalition government launched a new integration strategy ‘Creating the conditions for integration’(DCLG 2012) This was developed from the original Refugee Integration Strategy launched in 2000 – a support package to assist refugees to secure access to jobs, accommodation, welfare benefits, health, education and language services and to encourage community participation. The Department for Work and Pensions developed a complementary strategy to target practical assistance to refugees seeking to enter the labour market. Refugees’ needs were assessed by a caseworker so that they could be signposted to relevant services. Evidence suggests that the service has been insufficient to enable many refugees to overcome the disproportionate unemployment and broader challenges they experience (Phillimore and Goodson 2008).The integration debate itself has largely been shaped by a two-fold process. On the one hand there was a recognition that for communities to feel safe and enfranchised there had to be some form of induction into society and the wider community. On the other there was a fear that violent extremism could find a foothold in new and emerging communities if they felt disenfranchised, not understand either the values or the laws of their new country. Young people have been central to the debate about integration and specifically ‘in the interpretation of integration itself’ (Fekete et al, 2010:1). Certainly the integration programmatically outlined in the recent government report is profoundly at odds with much of the integration work on the ground. This raises the critical question of what kind of youth work practice is possible within this integration framework – one shaped by the divisions of the last decade and the UK’s apparent imperviousness to the high social cost of excluding young second-and-third generation black and Muslim Europeans from poorer backgrounds, from the debates that concern them. Fekete argues that it is surely time to consider the lasting impact of policies that marginalise, exclude, criminalise and, ultimately, alienate youngsters. (2010:3). The question of youth work for refugees and asylum seekers was comprehensively reviewed by Norton and Cohen at the very beginning of the National Asylum Support Scheme launched in 2000 (Norton and Cohen, 2000) and their work has significantly influenced the way practitioners have hitherto engaged in youth work around the issue. It has ‘accompanied’ youth work through informed debates about the question of integration in the last decade, raising key questions about practice and how this can be linked with a social justice approach to working with young people in communities. However, reviewing the historical territory of asylum seeker and refugee integration over the last decade would support a rethinking of the premises upon which that original work was formulated, and a questioning of how integration works for young

`28

people and how it might work in a future largely shaped by the current government’s recommendations about the nature of Englishness and the question of new identities. Central to the government’s integration initiatives vision is the concept of an England which has always been a haven of migration and tolerance, describing the problematic status of new or ‘outsider’ communities and their inability to conform to this vision of Englishness. Linked to this is the social cost of integration failure, specifically in terms of the narratives of violent extremism that can be taken up by young people in new communities as a result of political disenfranchisement and economic dispossession (DCLG 2012). Over the last few years, the debate on integration has ceased to be a two-way process based on dialogue, consultation and mutual respect. The daily diet served up by many politicians and much of the UK media is one that stigmatises minorities and blames them for failing to integrate.

A broad issue is the definition of integration and whose idea it is. In this sense the government perspective is integration from above, a view little different from some of the old assimilationist narratives of the 1970s (Hudson, 2013). Against this can be counterpoised a real, living integration that is symptomatic of the best of youth work practice, and the ‘lived experience’ of migrants in emerging communities who are ‘doing’ integration for themselves without an interventionist programme from above. However, some communities’ lack of integration is more the consequence of UK Imperialist ambitions in their lands of origin, the lack of access to ESOL classes and the absence of economic well-being, or in the case of asylum seekers themselves a ban on work and often on the right to study. All of which can be viewed as a consequence of governmental policies rather than an absence of any will to integrate on behalf of young people from those communities.

In UK academic and policy debates, the term ‘integration’ is not universally accepted. It still carries connotations of assimilation: in particular, a concern that the key focus of interest is whether migrants will become culturally similar to the rest of the population and the normative judgement that they ought to do so. A decade ago policy makers sought to counter the perception that this was the goal of integration policy. The Home Office consultation that preceded its Refugee Integration Strategy, for instance, insisted ‘Inclusion in our society does not mean that a refugee is required to assimilate’; and the strategy subsequently defined integration as ‘the process that takes place when refugees are empowered to achieve their full potential as members of British society, to contribute to the community, and to become fully able to exercise the rights and responsibilities that they share with other residents’ (Home Office 2005).

Obstacles/challenges concerning youth work with migrants in each partner country.

`29

A key consideration for policy makers is what happens to migrants after they arrive in the UK. Although some access employment, accommodation and relevant services without delay, enabling them to build new social networks, many do not. As a result, some migrant groups have low labour market participation rates which impacts on their access to adequate housing and health provision (Gidley and Jayaweera 2010). There is no consensus, however, on the reasons why this is the case. Public concern about migration can reflect a perception that some migrants are unwilling ‘to integrate’: to learn English, for instance, or mix socially with people from outside of their immediate community. Those working with migrants, however, emphasise the barriers to participation that they can face.

Young migrants become particularly vulnerable when they lose the rich array of interpersonal relationships with peers and family in their country of origin. This happens at a crucial moment of their lives, when these relationships would ordinarily help to shape their personal and social development as they begin the transition to adulthood.Instead, young migrants may encounter xenophobia and discrimination in destination countries and suffer disadvantages due to lack of fluency in the local language. Undocumented adolescents and youth face special challenges in the area of participation, due to their fear that calling attention to themselves puts them at risk for detention and/or deportation. Adolescent girls often face participation constraints in the form of culturally-defined gender roles and expectations that keep them from speaking up at, or even attending, a meeting or youth club.Barriers that inhibit young migrants’ participation include:

• Restrictions in law that preclude or restrict the participation of migrants or noncitizens in associations, unions or political activity in destination countries.

• Political discourse and/or policy measures that explicitly discourage migrant participation in local community and national policy affairs, including those that affect them directly.

• Lack of respect for the opinions of young people and negative perceptions that envision migrant youth as a problem, rather than a resource.

• Unequal opportunities and resources for young people to participate in development policy (opportunities are often available only to wealthy, well-educated nationals).

• Discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, class, religion, sexual orientation, disability and other factors, which interacts with discrimination based on nationality and migration status and prevents young migrants from participating or having a say in activities and programs.

• Lack of preparation and experience: Some young migrants have never been exposed to participatory environments (in homes, schools, communities or societies) and lack access to appropriate information to help them make informed choices and encourage

`30

their involvement. Young migrants from 11 countries with non-democratic political systems might at first feel uncomfortable about participating in political processes and civil society organizations.

• Access to institutions: Young migrants generally lack direct access to institutional structures within governments and in mainstream civil society sectors.

• Financial barriers: Very limited resources are made available for supporting organisations working on youth migration and youth participation issues. Funding for training teachers working with young migrants and for language classes is often very scarce.

• Lack of trust: Some adults believe that migrant adolescents and youth lack the compe-tency and experience to participate effectively in community affairs or in policy pro-cesses. In some countries, social and cultural norms make very difficult for youth to question or even discuss important issues with adults. As one youth worker reveals “I work as an interpreter and sometimes when I translate things, I know the caseworker is not going to believe it because it is so bad they can’t imagine it.” (Asylum Link Merseyside, 2016)

• Lack of time. For disadvantaged young people who study and work, day-to-day activi-ties have priority over participatory and consultation processes; this is especially true in the case of young migrants, who often have more immediate concerns than participa-tion, such as language acquisition, housing, income and integration.

• Language barriers - Research has shown that ability to speak English is strongly related

to labour market performance (Dustmann, Fabbri et al. 2003). In contrast to some other

European countries there is no targeted introductory language and orientation pro-

gramme for new arrivals to the UK but migrants can attend classes in English for Speak-

ers of Other Languages (ESOL). ESOL provision expanded significantly after 2004 when

enlargement of the EU, coupled with new language requirements for those seeking Citi-

zenship, led to increased demand. Budget challenges subsequently led to greater ra-

tioning of free places, however, so that some low paid migrants can no longer access

classes at no cost (NIACE 2008, Collett 2011). Research suggests that it is not in fact a

single process but a series relating to participation in the labour market and social insti-

tutions (such as education), social interaction, cultural practices and, for instance, civic

participation. The sense of identity and belonging of migrants, and of those with whom

they interact, may also change over time. The rate at which these processes take place

`31

depends on the migrant and on the opportunities open to them in the localities where

they live (Entzinger and Biezeveld 2003; Penninx and Martiniello 2004; Heckman et al.

2006; Robinson and Reeve 2006; Rutter, Cooley et al. 2008).

Asylum Link Merseyside quotes comments from refugees and asylum seekers known to

their organisation “Everything takes a long time...it’s hard to talk because you don’t

know the language and learning takes months and months, so you don’t make friends

either. Everything is long, long, long.” (Asylum Link Merseyside, 2016)

Good practice ExamplesPeacemaker – All People, All Communities, Oldham, UK. http://citiesofmigration.ca/good_idea/peacemaker/ The challenge with all youth focused programs is making sure that they remain relevant to the groups they are seeking to involve. With the foresight that first prompted their creation, Peacemaker began involving youth, their target audience, directly in their programming as well as the organisation’s leadership. Peacemaker prides itself on having real leadership by young people from their target communities and has two permanent youth seats on their Board of Directors. To ensure the relevancy of their work, Peacemaker has had peer educators and the young people that participate in the projects conduct a comprehensive review of their work. These young people work with trustees and senior members of staff to review the programs for relevance and impact both in Oldham and as it relates to the interests and concerns of young people across the country. This program scrutiny allows Peacemaker to identify gaps in service delivery and create new project ideas to address the changing needs and concerns of young people both in Oldham and across the North of England. Today Peacemaker’s motto is “All people, all communities” and their integration agenda is positioned as the “way forward for Britain.”

Nomad Youth Programme, London, UK.http://nomad-uk.org/youth-programmes/Nomad works with young people age 14-25 years old and their young leaders are up to 35 years old from a refugee and migrant background. The majority of people at the organisation have fled from conflict and war within their motherland. They are the first generation of “Refugee Diaspora” and from this they have developed into a vibrant network of young people who originate from across the world, taking initiatives to help make positive change in their own lives and the wider community. Another element of their work is to create a space where true integration can take place. Within this they recognise the importance of training and supporting our young leaders in order to lead their own work with their peers. Their Programme Approach

`32

uses Participatory Action Research (PAR) as a tool of delivery for all of their projects. PAR is a trans-disciplinary approach to knowledge and change-making that enables people to take control of their lives by combining formal and informal knowledge and using that new knowledge to transform their realities. It is a holistic research perspective incorporating elements of education, action and investigation. It differs from many other research perspectives in its commitment to social change (Pyrch 2012) Journey to Justice– VOICES of the people heard and challenge the injustice young people face today whilst challenging the current youth provision, to facilitate and bridge the gaps in greater society. Leadership– supporting young leaders to develop work locally and make links with groups around the country. To share good practice and adopt collaborative, effective ways of working to support the needs of young migrants (these include young people with refugee experiences, going through the asylum process, here with or without family). Support young leaders to have access to a variety of training.Belonging– To create an alternative environment for young people where they can be part of a diverse community of young people regardless of culture, religion, sexuality, gender, immigration status or personal background. Where young people can relax, discover who they are and explore who they want to be through taking part in new experiences which would involve many different opportunities. One of Nomad’s projects, ‘Together We Inspire’ offers an alternative space for young people to take part in creative workshops including dance projects, jewellery-making and painting. People take responsibility for their own actions in an inclusive environment, creating a sense of togetherness, where youth reach their potential and people from different cultures share food, ideas and take on life’s challenges together.

Semi-structured interviews

As part of the active research for the National Report, SAFE conducted 10 semi-structured interviews with youth workers who have experience working with young migrants/refugees/asylum seekers. Each participant has worked with these groups from between 2 and 10 years in a variety of different organisational settings.The interviews substantiate the findings of the research, highlighting the key issues facing youth workers whose beneficiaries are young migrants, refugees or asylum seekers. These include:

Cultural Barriers –Many youth workers expressed frustration at the lack of time and funding available for developing their own knowledge and understanding of the diverse cultural groups with which they were working. This lack of preparation can lead to difficulties and misunderstandings which may have been otherwise avoided. For example, some groups of young men from certain backgrounds found it difficult to relate and respond to female youth workers due to this being an alien concept within their own culture.

`33

Language Barriers – English is a very difficult language to learn and a lack of linguistic knowledge is a major obstacle in successful communications and subsequent learning opportunities. One practitioner described how this was overcome: “Once, with a group of refugees, it became clear that one of the young people knew English better than the rest so that person helped me to communicate with the group during the activity…”

Racism – Many of these groups experience discrimination and inequality of opportunities in many aspects of society, simply due to their ethnicity and their cultural circumstances and are often the victims of stereotypical misconceptions. This can lead to suspicion and even hostility towards anyone of a different cultural background, making integration very challenging for youth workers -particularly when the beneficiaries are unaccompanied minors.

Lack of specific training – youth workers felt unprepared and unqualified to deliver effective experiences to beneficiaries with whom they had difficulty in communicating with through their own lack of understanding of the language and/or culture.

Lack of suitable activities – with funding and subsidies being cut dramatically on a nation-wide scale as part of the government’s austerity measures, the opportunities for facilitating the delivery of creative and stimulating activities is becoming less available. This impedes youth workers in attempting to engage young migrants/refugees/asylum seekers in creative expression, community involvement and integration.

Confused identity – many of these young people are used to leading very adult lives, often working to support their families since a young age. This is in stark comparison to those of the same age in the UK, where they are considered children to be ‘protected’ under safeguarding/child protection legislation.Inefficient multi-agency collaboration – communication and cooperation amongst the varied agencies involved in supporting young migrants can be difficult and the implementation of strategies lengthy. Those interviewed stated the need to improve the level of communication between these networks in order to become more effective and avoid young migrants becoming apathetic and losing motivation.

Non- Formal EducationThe youth workers interviewed agreed that involving young migrants in dynamic non-formal learning environments was essential in encouraging a sense of cohesion, overcoming cultural diversities and language barriers. As one stated: “I have led art sessions in which everyone can participate… sometimes using instructions which are printed out in pictorial form, enabling ease of understanding by everyone.”However, all agreed that access to non-formal learning opportunities was limited by lack of funding for experienced creative practitioners to effectively deliver workshops on a regular and ongoing basis. Practitioners’ are also limited by the gaps in their own training and development of evaluation and assessment of non-formal learning situations.Promoting ICT literacy and responsible social media interaction were cited by several as useful tools in encouraging assimilation of a new language and communicating their thoughts and

`34

ideas. Some practitioners found the use of film and photography not only an asset in engaging and subsequently evaluating young migrant groups, but also it allowed them an opportunity for self-reflection and to take some ownership of their projects.

Conclusions It is necessary to problematise the question of identity theoretically and practically with reference to the ways in which young people themselves have engaged with and thought about identity. It is in that relationship between integration, identity and new communities and the enforcement of governmental visions of integration against those counterposed amongst young people in communities, living their life, that we can begin to map a new programme for youth work and youth activism with and for young asylum seekers. What happens if we throw away the newspapers and stop attending to the politicians? What happens if we listen to other voices, particularly the voices of those who are the butt of the ‘blame game’ in the integration debate (Fekete et al, 2010:2).Identity is the story we tell ourselves and others about us, what we share with others and what our differences are. It can be shaped by social structures, place and migration across territories. Fundamentally it is a narrative about ourselves and who we are.Certainly a focus on identity and self-narrative and how they can overcome enclavisation is profoundly different from the kind of assimilation from above doctrine perpetuated by the present administration.So in the context of the multiple needs of young refugees and asylum seekers what should refugee youth work look like? The best explication of this is to look at how it was best expressed at the beginning of the national dispersal scheme throughout the UK and the start of what might perhaps already be seen as the golden age of asylum seeking in the UK. Norton and Cohen’s (2000) was an attempt to understand the challenges faced in the integration of young refugees and to look at the kinds of youth work practice, committed to social justice, that might aid that integration and support. There was a clear recognition in their interviews with young people and youth work practitioners that many want to integrate with dignity into British culture and society while at the same time being free to value and cherish their own particular culture and identity (2000: vii). Indeed they argue that the dialectic of integration and difference was often central to their lives as they faced the challenge of a new life in the UK. The Asylum and Immigration Bill of January/ February 1999 provided the spur for and the context of the book. The message remains central to contemporary practice – namely that far from new communities being defined as a problem ‘for whom and to whom things should be done’ – those very communities, and young people specifically, were creating hugely positive futures for themselves, making friendships and so on often in contradiction to official ‘integration’, structural racism, and an unjust asylum process (Norton and Cohen, 2010:2). As Norton and Cohen state, the pivotal question for refugee youth work is that of self-determination (2010:9-

`35

10). The book is both a document of what refugee youth work looked like in 2000 and a manifesto for what good practice could be developed. The work Norton and Cohen document in London during the 1990s and their research into practice still holds up well and large parts of the text should be required reading for practitioners. However in some ways there is a focus on what might be called bonding rather than bridging experiences that not only stands in opposition to the current strands of government thinking but also to the kinds of work that subsequently developed around integration projects in non-governmental organisations, refugee community organisations and in local authority youth work.

The question of how to build bridges between communities and to bond within communities is a central debate in the practice of community development. Ideas developed by Putnam in his studies of Italian and American communities have reasserted the centrality of bonding/bridging and it is certainly a resonant motif in recent government debates both in the United States and the United Kingdom.A critical focus of the text was upon the support that youth work had to give to bonding and self-enclavisation which reflected a clear response from the respondents in the research. This argued that only community enclaves could provide the kinds of social capital that young people require. All stressed how important commonality to be – speaking the same language, sharing experiences etc., with many finding this early advice and comfort from members of their own communities either informally, or in a facility such as a community centre. An area of importance for youth workers was the facilitation of ‘Mother-tongue classes’ in which the language and cultures of lands of origin could be preserved and the young people initiated into the kinds of identities which were often acceptable to the community leadership. As Norton and Cohen recognised this was a profoundly ‘inner-directed’ Refugee Community Organisation (RCO) culture. Also at the time the text was written RCOs were the principal providers of youth work in London largely on a volunteering basis or, if short term funding was available, via the employment of members of the community, often without any qualifications. These were expected to initiate and promote ‘inner-directed’ youth work which was more concerned with internal support and bonding activities designed than any kind of bridging activities to prepare communities for their future life in the UK (Putnam, 2000).So in the context of the multiple needs of young refugees and asylum seekers what should refugee youth work look like?As Sivanandan notes in Fekete’s study of the integration problematic in Europe, ‘the problem of integration lies in the interpretation of integration itself’.Imposed integration has very different implications from integration by choice. This raises the critical question of what kind of youth work practice is possible within this integration framework – one shaped by the divisions of the last decade. For both asylum seekers and more settled Muslim communities, Europe and the UK seem impervious to the high social cost of excluding young second-and-third generation black and Muslim Europeans from poorer backgrounds from the debates that concern them. It is surely time to consider the lasting impact of policies that marginalise, exclude, criminalise and, ultimately, alienate youngsters (Fekete et al, 2010). The question of youth work for refugees and asylum seekers was comprehensively reviewed by Norton and Cohen at the very beginning of the National Asylum Support Scheme launched in

`36

2000 (Norton and Cohen, 2000). Their work has significantly influenced the way practitioners have since engaged in youth work around the issue, ‘accompanying’ youth work through informed debates about the question of integration in the last decade. Norton and Cohen raise key questions about practice and how this can be linked with a social justice approach to working with young people in communities. It is in that relationship between integration, identity and new communities and the enforcement of particular governmental visions of integration, against those counterposed amongst young people living in communities, that a new programme for youth work and youth activism with and for young asylum seekers can be developed.· Migrant youth and adolescent participation in the life and decision-making of communities where they live is crucial to their engagement as community members.· Migrant youth and adolescent participation derives from and realises universal human rights to expression, information, conscience, association and peaceful assembly.· Migrant youth and adolescent participation is crucial to their integration in destination countries, and to maintaining social cohesion.· Migrant youth’s and adolescents’ access to and engagement in community groups, civilsociety organisations, unions, youth groups, and sports and cultural organisations isessential to their participation in community life in their country of residence; all suchorganisations should welcome, support and promote migrant youth participation.· Inclusive participation by migrant adolescents and youth in shaping and implementing migration – and other – policies affecting them is critical to taking account of their views, needs, challenges, experiences and recommendations.· Young migrants’ participation yields vital insights for migration policy-making, improveseffective implementation, and strengthens sustainability of interventions.· Including migrant youth in all steps of policy processes, including implementation andmonitoring, helps ensure that their needs and recommendations are not ignored.· Governments can enhance adolescent and youth capacity, well-being, and enthusiasm for meaningful participation, by ensuring that young migrants enjoy their rights to participation, health, education and other key services.

Cohen and Norton (2000) concluded Refugee Community Organisations (RCOs) to be the principle providers of youth work for young refugees in London. Their report found the development of youth work practice to be seriously under-resourced, with a real need for training and financial support, including access to equipment and activities in the wider community. This was highlighted as essential to bridge inter-generational gaps.The work of RCOs with young people is seriously under-resourced and there is a need for more training, financial support as well as access to equipment, materials and activities in the wider community. Young refugees with post-traumatic stress disorder need additional support. Youth workers need to ensure that young refugees are linked up with a range of statutory agencies such as schools, the immigration service and social services and these agencies need appropriate training and support. Working with the parents and families of young refugees is also crucial.The key findings of the research with mainstream youth work provision are as follows:

`37

There is a lack of understanding of the specific needs of young refugees in mainstream services and they are often subsumed within the larger category of 'ethnic minority'. Most examples of good practice were found to be at project level and it was unexpected not to see this work developed more. Signs of increased activity in Youth Services were seen at the time of the Kosovan crisis. Thought needs to be given as to how relationships between Youth Services and the refugee community sector can be developed. The over-arching recommendation is that an appropriate and relevant youth work provision for refugee communities needs to be developed. A number of specific and detailed recommendations are then made in relation to this to local authority youth services and other providers of Youth Services, providers of youth work training, the National Youth Agency and national voluntary youth organisations, the Department for Education and Employment, the Home Office and funders.

References

Asylum link Merseyside (2016) http://www.asylumlink.org.uk/refugee-stories/ Collett, E. (2011) “Immigrant Integration in Europe in a Time of Austerity.” Migration Policy Institute, Washington DC.DCLG (2012) Creating the conditions for integration. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/7504/2092103.pdfDustmann, C., F. Fabbri et al. (2003) “Labour Market Performance of Immigrants in the UK Labour Market.” Home Office, London. http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/rdsolr0503.pdf.Entzinger, H. and R. Biezeveld. (2003) “Benchmarking in Immigrant Integration.” European Commission, Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/funding/2004_2007/doc/study_indicators_integration.pdf.Fekete, L., Bouteldja, N. and Muhe, N. (2010) Alternative Voices on Integration in Austria, France, Germany, Netherlands and the UK, London: Institute for Race Relations. Gidley, B. and H. Jayaweera. (2010) “An Evidence Base on Migration and Integration in London.” Centre on Migration, Policy and Society, University of Oxford.Heckman, F. et al. “Integration and Integration Policies.” (2006). IMISCOE Network Feasibility Study, IMISCOE, Amsterdam. Home Office (2005) “Integration Matters.” Home Office, London. Hudson, M. (2013) ‘The Spiral Plait: Integration, Arts and Migrant Women’, St Antony’s 55 Youth & Policy No. 112 April 2014 Enclavisation and Identity in Refugee Youth Work International Review (9:1) pp. 92-107. http://www.youthandpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/hudson.pdfKilbride, K.M., Anisef, P., Baichman-Anisef, E. and Khattar, R. (2000) Between Two Worlds: The Experiences and Concerns of Immigrant Youth in Ontario, Toronto: Joint Centre for Research on Immigration and Settlement

`38

Markaki, Yvonni. (2015) “The demographics of young migrants in the UK“. Migration Observatory briefing, COMPAS, Oxford.Migration and youth: challenges and opportunities: Key Messages and Policy Recommendations (2014). Eds: Cortina, Jeronimo; Taran, Patrick; and Raphael, Alison.Global Migration Group .UNICEF. http://www.globalmigrationgroup.org/system/files/23._Key_Messages_and_Policy_Recommendations.pdf. Migration Observatory (2016). “Young People and Migration in the UK: An Overview.” Oxford University. http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/reports/young-people-migration-uk-overview/National Institute of Adult and Continuing Education (NIACE)(2008). “Response to the DIUS consultation ‘ESOL and Community Cohesion’.” NIACE, Leicester.Norton, R. and Cohen, B. (2000) Out of Exile: Developing youth work with young refugees, Leicester: National Youth Agency.Office for National Statistics (ONS). (2016) “CT0562 – Age by year of arrival in the UK by sex by country of birth.” .Penninx, R. and M. Martiniello. (2004) “Integration Processes and Policies: State of the Art and Lessons.” In Citizenship in European Cities: Immigrants, Local Politics and Integration Policies, by R. Penninx et al. Aldershot: Ashgate.Phillimore, J., Goodson L. (2008) Making a Place in the Global City - The Relevance of Indicators of Integration, Journal of Refugee Studies 21: 305-325Putnam, R.D. (2000) Bowling Alone: the Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York: Simon and Schuster.Pyrch, T. (2012) Breaking Free: A facilitator's guide to participatory action research practice Lulu. Robinson, D. and K. Reeve. (2006)“Neighbourhood Experiences of New Immigration.” Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York. Rutter, J., L. Cooley, et al. (2008) “Moving Up Together: Promoting Equality and Integration among the UK’s Diverse Communities.” Institute for Publi Policy Research, London.

`39

Innovative Techniques for Reaching Out to Migrant Youth Project

Contract number: 2016-2- ES02-KA205- 008204

NATIONAL DESK RESEARCH

- BULGARIA-

for Intellectual Output 1:State of the art report on the Obstacles for Youth Work with Migrants

`40

DESK RESEARCH

DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT NATIONAL SITUATION

The immigrants’ waves in Bulgaria traditionally were connected with large historical events. In

example, the fall of communism at the end of 1989 saw greater migration to Bulgaria, when

large groups of Chinese, Arabs, Russians, Ukrainians, Turks, Vietnamese, Albanians, a number of

Armenians from the Republic of Armenia, some Africans, and an increasing number of EU

nationals established themselves permanently in Bulgaria.

These people are now well settled and integrated, residing mainly in the capital and the largest

cities of the country. Easily integrated and well accepted by the local people, migrant youth from

those countries origin and period benefits from specifically targeted education and business

support services.

The country's accession to the EU on January 1, 2007 has not yet led to a significant rise in

immigrants, although there is a growth in the number of refugees from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq,

Sub-Saharan Africa, Armenia and some Christian Palestinians. The slow procedures of granting

asylum and refugee status, the low living standard compared to the EU average and the

postponement of entry to the Schengen area contribute to the low number of refugees and

asylum seekers.

The recent decade saw a growth of private businesses opened by citizens of Russia, Ukraine,

Turkey, China, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the countries in the Middle East, notably Syria and

Lebanon. Also during the last decade, Russian, Ukrainian, EU and US citizens purchased holiday

properties along the Black sea coast, as well as in the interior.

According to official data, the number of permanent foreign residents in Bulgaria as at

31.12.2008 is 66,806 and the vast majority of these come from Russia (21,309), Ukraine (5,350),

FYROM (4,375), Turkey (3,828) and Moldova (2.203). This number does not include immigrants

`41

who have already obtained Bulgarian citizenship or illegal immigrants. The number of

immigrants in Bulgaria was expected to grow as a result of the accession of Bulgaria in the

European Union in 2007.

Since the beginning of the Syrian Civil War in 2011, the number of Syrian refugees in Bulgaria

grew. Together with the Syrian refugee families, many illegal migrants, mainly males, from

countries like Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Chad, Eritrea, Somalia,

Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq entered illegally through the Bulgarian-Turkish border.[3]

Bulgaria is strategically located in the South Eastern corner of the European Union, being one of

the gates into Europe along the Balkan and the East Mediterranean migration routes. Prior to

2013, the country was not a preferred entry or transit destination for migrants. Since June 2013,

however, the situation in Bulgaria has dynamically changed with regard to the number of

undocumented migrants. The majority of undocumented migrants who arrive in Bulgaria try to

continue their journey to destination countries in North and Western Europe. Most

undocumented migrants who are detected by the Border Police initiate a procedure for seeking

international protection. In recent years there has been a constant increase in the number of

migrants seeking international protection. For 2015 and 2016 the top five countries are Iraq;

Afghanistan; Syria; Pakistan; and Iran. Worthy of note is the increase in 2015 and 2016 of the

number of Afghan citizens who represent over 46 percent of the total number of migrants

detected by Border Police for 2016 and 40 percent of the new asylum seekers for 2016.

The overwhelming majority of the EU and Bulgaria included refugees originate from countries

where the most basic resources required for health, such as safe drinking-water, housing,

adequate food supply and education are scarce.

In many refugee-producing countries diseases and conditions long controlled in western

societies through public health measures, appropriate physical planning and social support

measures are unknown. This is also true of many of the countries in which refugees have spent a

period of asylum before being resettled in the EU.

Many refugees have had poor access to health care prior to arriving in the EU. Refugee-

producing countries often have poorly developed health care infrastructure, compounded by the

effects of war and natural disasters. As a result people from refugee backgrounds may have

`42

diseases and conditions, some sustained or acquired as a consequence of deprivation and

trauma, which have been poorly managed. They are also likely to have had limited access to

mental health support and to prevention or screening programmes such as immunization. So

Despite EU best efforts, health needs are escalating, and more than four years of crisis is causing

the Syrian health system to deteriorate. We’re seeing increasing trauma cases, rising mental

health needs, reproductive health issues and both communicable and non-communicable

diseases. A cholera outbreak has arisen in neighboring Iraq – reminding us all that disease

outbreaks have a tendency to afflict countries already afflicted by protracted crises. The EU

needs urgent prepositioning medical supplies and putting preparedness measures in place to

forestall potential spread into Syria. And while health needs are rising, resources are shrinking.

Continued attacks on health facilities, ambulances and health workers by parties to the conflict

have become a disturbing feature in the crisis. As of September 2015, 58% of public hospitals

were either partially functional or completely destroyed.

Bulgarian Turks are a Turkish ethnic group from Bulgaria. As of 2011 there are 588,318

Bulgarians of Turkish descent, roughly 8.8% of the population, making them the country's

largest ethnic minority. They primarily live in the southern province of Kardzhali and the

northeastern provinces of Shumen, Silistra, Razgrad and Targovishte. There is also a diaspora

outside Bulgaria in countries such as Turkey, Austria, Netherlands, and Sweden, the most

significant of which are the Bulgarian Turks in Turkey. Bulgarian Turks are the descendants of

Turkish settlers who entered the region after the Ottoman conquest of the Balkans in the late

14th and early 15th centuries, as well as Bulgarian converts to Islam who became Turkified

during the centuries of Ottoman rule. The Turkish community became an ethnic minority when

the Principality of Bulgaria was established after the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78. This

community is of Turkish ethnic consciousness and differs from the majority Bulgarian ethnicity

and the rest of the Bulgarian nation by its own language, religion, culture, customs, and

traditions.

Romani people in Bulgaria constitute one of the country's largest ethnic minorities. The Romani

are the third or second largest ethnic group, depending on the data. According to the census in

2011, in which 90% of the population stated their ethnic group, the total number of Romani is

`43

325,343 or 4.4%, making Bulgaria the country with highest percentage of Romani in Europe. The

2011 census recorded a lower figure than that in 2001.

While Romani have the highest birth rate in Europe and are considered the fastest growing

group, and the largest minority, there is controversy about their number. They also tend to have

high death and immigration rates. The majority of the estimated 200,000-400,000 Muslim

Romani tend to identify themselves as ethnic Turks, others deny their origin, especially if they

are well integrated within the Bulgarian culture and society, also if they are children of mixed

couples since they usually have limited to even possibly zero connections to Romani culture,

traditions, society or language. It is possible that the number of Romani does not decrease along

with the rest of Bulgaria's population and, according to some estimates, their number may have

risen to 600,000 or 800,000 including those who prefer to identify as ethnic Turks or ethnic

Bulgarians. The Romani people in Bulgaria "speak Bulgarian, Turkish or Romani, depending on

the region and their religious affiliations." The Romani people have darker pigmentation than

most of Bulgaria's ethnic groups as a result of their Indian descent. They are not concentrated in

specific regions, but are rather spread throughout the country in similar frequencies, not

constituting a majority in any Bulgarian province or municipality. However, there are villages

with Romani majority.

They are emancipated social group, having higher crime, unemployment, birth, death and

poverty rates, and not many of them attend school. Though most live in poverty, the Romani are

represented in Bulgarian mafia and rich Romani crime bosses deal with drug trade and

prostitution. Though most of them are officially unemployed, they have a high rate of child sex

workers. Roma constitute the majority of prison population according to self-identification of

inmates, with 7000 prisoners (70%) out of 10,000 in total. According to 2002 data, the poverty

rate among Romani is 61.8%, in contrast to a rate of 5.6% among Bulgarians. In 1997, 84% of

Bulgarian Romani lived under the poverty line, compared with 32% of ethnic Bulgarians. In

1994, the poverty rate of Romani was estimated at 71.4%, compared with 15% for Bulgarians.

However, they enjoy more financial aid than other citizens, especially for children, which may

have prompt the higher birth rates of the Romani. Many live with humanitarian aid without

working.

`44

In 2011 the share of Romani with university degree reached 0.3%, while 6.9% have secondary

education; the same share was 22.8%/47.6% for Bulgarians.

The Turks are more negative towards the Romani than the Bulgarians, with 30-50% rejecting

various interactions and friendship with Romani. Although only 25% of Romani parents object to

their children to be married with a Bulgarian and a Turk, only 4% of the Bulgarians and 6% of

the Turks would marry a Romani person. Romani are avoided by the majority traditionally,

especially for marriage, however, there are ethnically mixed people with Gypsy and Bulgarian

parents who are called "zhorevtsi" (from the common name George).

Bulgaria participates in the Decade of Roma Inclusion, an international initiative to improve the

socio-economic status and social inclusion of Roma, with eight other governments committing

themselves to "work toward eliminating discrimination and closing the unacceptable gaps

between Roma and the rest of society". The rights of the Romani people in the country are also

represented by political parties and cultural organizations, most notably the Civil Union "Roma".

Noted Roma from Bulgaria include musicians Azis, Sofi Marinova and Ivo Papazov, surgeon

Aleksandar Chirkov, politicians Toma Tomov and Tsvetelin Kanchev, footballer Marian Ognyanov,

and 1988 Olympic boxing champion Ismail Mustafov

Russians form the fourth largest ethnic group in Bulgaria, numbering 9,978 according to the

2011 census, and mostly living in the large urban centres, such as Sofia, Plovdiv, Varna and

Burgas. Although the largest wave of Russian settlers (White Guards) arrived following the

events surrounding the October Revolution and the Russian Civil War, compact groups of

Russians had been living in Bulgaria for centuries before that.

Nowadays, Russians in Bulgaria are represented by a number of organizations, such as Soyuz

sootechestvenikov (Union of Compatriots), the Union of Russian Citizens and the Society of

White Guardsmen.

Armenians are the fifth largest minority, after Russians, in Bulgaria, numbering 6,552 according

to the 2011 census, down from 10,832 in 2001, while Armenian organizations estimate up to

22,000. Armenians have lived in the Balkans (including the territory of modern Bulgaria) since no

`45

later than the 5th century, when they moved there as part of the Byzantine cavalry. Since then,

the Armenians have had a continuous presence in Bulgarian lands and have often played an

important part in the history of Bulgaria from early Medieval times until the present. The main

centres of the Armenian community in the country are the major cities Plovdiv (3,140 Armenians

in Plovdiv Province in 2001), Varna (2,240 in Varna Province), Sofia (1,672) and Burgas (904 in

Burgas Province). The traditional language of the community is Western Armenian, though since

education during the Communist period in Bulgaria was in Eastern Armenian, many are also

fluent in the latter dialect. Bulgarian, being the official language, is spoken fluently by almost all

Armenians in the country.

Arabs in Bulgaria are the people from Arab countries, particularly Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinian

Territories, Iraq, and Jordan and also small groups from Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Libya

and Sudan, who emigrated from their native nations and currently reside in Bulgaria. Most Arab

Bulgarians are of Lebanese or Syrian origin, because they were the first Arabs to arrive in

Bulgaria. The first Arabs came to Bulgaria in the late 1960s and early 1970s as students in

Bulgarian universities. In the over forty-year history of this community, 11,400 Arabs have

migrated to Bulgaria. According to other data from two teams of anthropologists and

sociologists, the number of Arabs in Bulgaria who are legal residents and officially have work

permits was 17,000 in 2004. (the number 17,000 includes not only Arabs but also Kurds,

Iranians, Afghans, Berber and others.) In addition, Bulgaria has people from Arab countries, who

have the status of refugees (refugees of the Syrian civil war, but only 10% of them are Syrian

Arabs, the other 90% of them are Syrian Kurds) or illegal immigrants (Algerians of mainly Berber

descent and usually mistakenly called Arabs) trying to immigrate to Western Europe.

Abuse of Migrants, Refugees, and Stateless Persons:

The constitution and law provide for freedom of movement within the country, foreign travel,

emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights. Human

rights organizations continued to report police and civilian vigilante violence against migrants

and asylum seekers, including assaults, beating, and humiliation, at the country’s borders. In

June the prosecution brought charges of xenophobia-motivated attempted murder against two

`46

men who attacked and stabbed an asylum seeker returning to a refugee center after a trip to

the grocery store. Human rights organizations claimed that data indicated the government

employed violence and forceful pushbacks to prevent access to the border. In January, Human

Rights Watch released a report describing 59 cases of asylum seekers from Iraq, Syria, and

Afghanistan being pushed back to Turkey, with 46 of them claiming to have been robbed and

beaten by border guards. On November 17, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee accused the

government of indiscriminately pushing back asylum seekers and migrants and stated that

between May and September it had received 33 reports of police mistreatment, including the

robbing, physical violence against, and degrading treatment of more than 600 migrants. On

November 24, police fired water cannon and rubber bullets at rioting migrants in the reception

center near Harmanli. The camp was sealed after reports that some migrants were suffering

from infectious skin diseases. A week earlier, local residents had protested and called for the

camp’s closure after media reports of contagious skin diseases. Camp residents threw stones

and tires at police, broke windows, and set fire to furniture. More than 400 asylum seekers were

arrested after the clash, and their deportation to their countries of origin was pending at the

end of the year. There were reports of vigilante groups conducting citizen arrests of migrants

along the border with Turkey, and police authorities encouraged citizens to alert them when

they spotted groups of migrants who entered the country illegally. A video posted online on

April 10 showed Petar Nizamov, who purportedly belonged to the group Civil Squad for

Protection of Women and Faith, detaining three migrants by forcing them to lie on the ground

with their hands zip tied behind their backs and telling them to go back to Turkey. A similar

video featured the self-proclaimed “migrant hunter” Dinko Valev who, on February 14, called

the emergency line 112 to report that he had detained 16 migrants--15 adults and one child--

forcing them to lie on the ground and subjecting them to death threats and verbal abuse. On

April 10, the prime minister expressed gratitude to the vigilante groups because “everyone

helping [the government] deserves thanks” and told journalists that he had instructed the

border police leadership to award a vigilante group for its contribution to border security. On

April 11, he stated he had been misquoted and noted that the government does not tolerate

any violations of the law or inhuman treatment. On November 25, the Burgas district court

`47

started a trial against Nizamov for an illegal arrest and on November 15, the Sredets prosecution

service opened an investigation against Valev for ethnic/nationality-based discrimination,

violence, and hatred.

Extreme nationalist parties used antimigrant rhetoric in their political campaigns. Negative

coverage of migrants appeared in some media, claiming they were mostly criminals and

terrorists and repeating negative stereotypes that encouraged societal intolerance. In

September, following a brawl among asylum seekers in the Harmanli reception center, the

extreme nationalist parties Patriotic Front and Ataka held a demonstration demanding the

immediate closure of all reception centers and the return of their occupants to their countries

of origin. The patriarch of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church stated in September that it is

important “to maintain the ethnic balance on Bulgaria’s territory and the peace and security of

Bulgarian citizens.”

In August the UN high commissioner for human rights criticized the country for detaining all

irregular migrants who have not applied for asylum and for prosecuting and jailing them “if they

try to leave.”

The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees

(UNHCR) and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to

refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons, and other persons of concern.

This all started to change over the summer months, however, for a number of reasons. Firstly,

the crisis had become too big and too close to home to ignore. The mass of people moving from

northern Greece to Serbia en route to northern Europe via Macedonia, which of course shares a

border with Bulgaria, meant that the refugee crisis was now surrounding Bulgaria, not just

confined to its backwater borders with Turkey. Thus, Bulgaria is now seeing an increase in

refugees massing on its borders. According to the UNHCR as of September 2015 around 6,800

refugees have entered Bulgaria illegally without claiming asylum and 5,000 have illegally left

Bulgaria without being processed at a border checkpoint. This, alongside the mandatory refugee

quota, means Bulgaria is now keen to see a pan-European solution put in place.

The event, however, that brought home to the Bulgarians, more than anything, that they could

`48

no longer ignore their refugee crisis, was the arrest in Hungary of three Bulgarian citizens

accused of human trafficking. These men from Lom in northern Bulgaria are accused of causing

the death of 71 refugees who died as a result of being transported in a truck designed for

refrigerated goods, and was thus hermetically sealed. All 71 refugees, including four children,

suffocated to death. The truck was abandoned on the road in Austria where the bodies were

discovered. The traffickers had fled the scene.

This, alongside the fact that the refugee crisis was filling the front pages of practically every

international newspaper with shocking images of the suffering of the refugees, meant that

Bulgarian press could no longer ignore the crisis. It is interesting to note that unlike in western

Europe, the images of the drowned Syrian child on a beach in Turkey did not hit the front pages

of the Bulgarian newspapers.

Rather than being moved from their inertia by these images, it was rather the trafficking case

that caused the Bulgarian public and the Bulgarian press to realize that there needed to be an

urgent reassessment of Bulgaria’s standing in Europe and what sort of society Bulgaria has.

International news coverage exposed the fact that Bulgarian citizens with long criminal records

and who were well-known to police had been involved in the deaths of these refugees. What

did this say to the international community about Bulgaria? The spotlight was put on Bulgaria as

a nation and questions started to be asked as to what Bulgaria was doing to deal with the

refugees.

The fact that Bulgarian citizens are involved in people trafficking has highlighted Bulgaria’s

inability to deal with organised crime more widely, which has a damning effect on Bulgaria’s

desire to be seen as a ‘good’ member of the EU. As such, the Bulgarian government has spoken

out strongly in favour of a pan-European solution to the crisis and also has been adamant in its

desire to tackle crime and trafficking across Europe.

GOOD PRACTICES

LEAD actors in large scale immigration programmes are the national institutions in Bulgaria.

Concentrated in the Sofia capital city, and the major hotspots, the major sources of best practices

identified are the following programmes:

`49

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) Bulgaria supports the socio-economic

integration of third country nationals (TCNs) in Bulgaria by offering them individually tailored

services and integration activities. In 2009 the IOM Bulgaria managed to establish and develop

Information centers for Immigrants in Sofia, Plovdiv and Burgas (due to reduced funding the

Information center in Plovdiv had to be shut down). The Information centers provide advice on

Bulgarian legal and administrative system and organise activities for the immigrants helping

them to acquire basic knowledge of language, history, institutions, socio-economic features,

cultural life and fundamental values. Also, the Information centers organize awareness-raising

campaigns and intercultural events aimed at increasing the understanding and acceptance of

migration in the host society, as well as promoting the immigrants’ contribution to the

development of the local economy and welfare.

Following the EU-accession, Bulgaria became an immigration country with a constantly

increasing number of legally residing non-EU nationals. In response to this trend, the IOM

developed an Integration Program aimed to facilitate the integration of newly arrived non-EU

nationals into Bulgarian society and working life by establishing Information centers for

immigrants in the cities of Sofia and Burgas. The Information centers provide guidance and

information and they organise activities for the immigrants helping them to acquire basic

knowledge of language, history, institutions, socio-economic features, cultural life and

fundamental values.

The target group of the Program are newly-arrived non-EU nationals legally residing in Bulgaria

(except for seasonal workers or workers posted for the purpose of providing cross-border

services, persons residing in order to pursue studies or vocational training, asylum seekers and

refugees). The largest shares of non-EU nationals come from the Russian Federation, Ukraine,

Moldova and some Arabian countries, and they are mainly concentrated in the capital and major

Bulgarian cities.

In general, the activities of the IOM Information centers for immigrants include:

Informing immigrants about Bulgarian administrative and legal system as well as

increasing their awareness of their rights and obligations in Bulgaria;

Supporting immigrants’ access to institutions as well as to public and private services in a

non-discriminatory way thus establishing a stable basis for better integration;

Supporting immigrants with information as well as consulting and directing them to the

`50

relevant competent authorities in social, educational, health and other spheres;

Labour and business orientation of immigrants about terms and procedures for regular

employment and access to labour market as well as about the procedures for starting an

entrepreneurship in Bulgaria;

Increasing immigrants’ awareness of socio-economical aspects, institutional framework

and culture-historical specifics of Bulgarian society;

Facilitating the process of integration of TCNs in Bulgarian society through measures for

raising the tolerance towards immigrants;

Stimulating immigrants’ inclusion in social life on local level and thus assisting their

integration;

Establishing good integration practices aimed at a better starting position for the

integration of TCNs.

The consultations provided by the Information centers are given by specialized legal experts and

they cover different issues concerning the regulations on the residence permits, social benefits,

taxes, access to labour market and anything related to the functioning of the Bulgarian National

Administrative System.

In order to facilitate the consultation process and to cover the whole territory of the country, the

IOM enables immigrants to address their queries by all available means. The consultations are

provided at the offices of the Information centers, by phone, by e-mail queries, on individual

base, or in groups. Also, the Information centers organize group consultations outside the

Information centers in places with high concentration of non-EU nationals. Thus the consultation

process was improved and simplified in terms of time and effectiveness. It makes information

easily available for any given non-EU national residing in any city of Bulgaria, and even for

those abroad who are planning to arrive and settle in the country.

The activities under the Integration Program also include developing and disseminating of

various printed materials, such as:

Information leaflets for TCN’s in different languages (Bulgarian, Russian, English,

French, Arabic and Persian) which are regularly updated according to the legal and

procedural amendments in the respective legislation;

Promotional flyers and cards (in Bulgarian language) designed for the awareness raising

campaigns on the positive immigrants’ contribution to the development of Bulgarian

`51

society. They are distributed during public awareness raising campaigns;

Information bulletin (in Bulgarian) dedicated to the “successful stories” of integration of

TCNs in Bulgaria, aimed at promoting immigrants’ positive contribution to Bulgarian

society and welfare.

The Information centers organize various multicultural and information events aimed to promote

the culture of immigrant communities and also to bring different communities together

(discussion groups, cultural and sports events, excursions, celebration of festive events of the

immigrant groups, etc.) These events traditionally attract a large number of people both from

immigrant communities and the host society. The information multicultural events are organized

in areas with a high concentration of non-EU nationals and also are used as a tool for providing

consultations outside the Information centers.

In addition to the multicultural events, the Information centers organize different clubs for the

immigrants and their children, such as Bulgarian Folk Dancing, Socio-Cultural Competence,

Fine Arts & Crafts, Bulgarian language speaking practice. The latter was initiated and provided

by school students on a voluntary basis.

The activities of the Information centers were implemented successfully in cooperation with

cultural mediators from local migrant communities. The team of cultural mediators facilitated the

communication between the IOM and the immigrants’ communities and helped the Information

centers to identify the newly arrived representatives of the target group.

Results

2 operational Information centers for immigrants in Sofia and Burgas;

The IOM information centers have proved to be sustainable “one-stop shops” points for

information, services, intercultural dialogue, effectively encouraging the full involvement

and participation of immigrants in the social life of Bulgarian society;

More than 7 000 legally residing TCNs have been covered by integration activities in the

period between 2009 and 2015.

Evaluation

In 2012 the European Commission evaluated the project as a “good practice” in the field of

integration of TCNs. Some “success stories” of immigrants who have effectively integrated

in the social and business life in Bulgaria were documented in the EC database.

Diversity is Tasty, a culinary media campaign in Bulgaria

`52

Diversity is Tasty is a national media campaign that puts the culinary added-value of foreigners

(EU citizens and third country nationals, including refugees) in the Bulgarian culture under the

spotlight. It aims at fighting discrimination, xenophobia and hate speech, by celebrating

diversity.

Bulgaria is becoming a new country of immigration. However, due to a lack of information about

foreign cultures, wide-spread stereotypes and fear, the Bulgarian society is still unprepared for

this change. In addition, when Media do cover immigration and asylum, the tone is often

insensitive and negative. Journalists lack basic knowledge about these issues and produce rather

unbalanced stories. Such situation creates unfavourable public opinion and consequently

hampers the integration of migrants who rarely are given the opportunity to present themselves

in a positive way. With Diversity is Tasty, NGO Multi Kulti Collective and its partners offered

foreigners 'air time' to tell their stories, through food.

The project team's efforts were allocated to 3 main tasks:

Collection of stories. They organised meetings with foreigners living in Bulgaria to collect their

personal stories and authentic recipes. They also run a photoshoot to produce professional

images of both the dishes and the amateur cooks. In total, as many as 83 recipes were

documented.

Media strategy. Among promotional materials, a dedicated website, a presentation video, 5

different post cards with recipes and 15 web banners were designed. 1 press conference, in a

form of a media lunch was orchestrated and more than 25 influential media, such as Bulgaria's

National Television and BBC Good Food, accepted to partner with the project. During the weeks

that followed the press conference, they published migrants' recipes and accompanying stories in

their respective media on a weekly or monthly basis, along with their own complementary

interviews. In addition, Sofia University, in collaboration with UNHCR, the Association of

European Journalists and the Council of Refugee Women, partnered with the project team to

propose a training session on migration/integration issues to its students, and other media

professionals. 2 cooking classes targeted at food bloggers were also hosted by 5 of the

participating migrants.

ublic participation. In order to actively involve Bulgarian citizens in the campaign, a special

cooking game was conducted. Bulgarians were invited to prepare and post a picture of their

version of foreign dishes featured in the project, in order to win free meals at selected restaurants

`53

offering international cuisine. Winners were announced during the Diversity is Tasty photo

exhibition organised in Sofia. Internal evaluation revealed that Migrants were eager to open up to

the Bulgarian society and present both their national cuisine and personal stories. Media partners

were also easy to convince as most of them already offer culinary programmes and are always

looking for original angles. The fact that a great amount of high quality and ready-to-use content

such as photos, interviews, recipes, was made available to them was considered an additional

incentive.

Concerning the general public’s response, it was very positive. The project team has received a

significant amount of supportive comments on social networks and by emails.

Moreover, Diversity is Tasty is selected as one of the best practices to be published in an EEA

Grants guidebook end 2016.

Support for voluntary return and reintegration of undocumented third-country nationals

residing in Bulgaria.

Donor: Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) through the Bulgarian Ministry

of Interior

Since 2009 IOM Sofia has carried out 16 Assisted Voluntary Return and Reintegration (AVRR)

programs during which the following key results have been achieved:

A number of awareness raising campaigns were carried out providing information on

voluntary return through leaflets, posters and TV spots to over 54,000 undocumented

migrants and asylum seekers in Bulgaria.

1,352 migrants were individually informed and counselled as regards voluntary return

options

737 undocumented migrants were effectively supported in their voluntary return in safety

and dignity

222 of the voluntary returnees were provided with reintegration assistance

Provision of information and counselling for voluntary return. Donor: Asylum, Migration

and Integration Fund (AMIF) through the Bulgarian Ministry of Interior

The programme assists undocumented third country nationals (TCNs) staying in Bulgaria. The

`54

project activities consist of providing information and counselling on possibilities for voluntary

return to TCNs, including rejected asylum seekers and persons provided with international

protection.

Counter-Trafficking

This programme has been the main focus of IOM Sofia from 1999 to 2010. IOM Sofia has

supported substantially the establishment of the Bulgarian counter-trafficking system, with IOM

as the key counterpart of the National Counter-Trafficking Commission and of the Government

of Bulgaria on counter-trafficking. IOM’s support includes:

Development of the National Counter-Trafficking Legislatio

Formation of the National and Local Counter-Trafficking Commissions

Refurbishment and equipment of the National Commission’s Offices

Development of the national official counter-trafficking website

Establishment of the Permanent Working Group under the Counter-Trafficking

Commission, of which IOM Sofia’s Head of Office is a regular member

Development and implementation of the Annual Counter Trafficking National Action

Plans

Other achievements of IOM Sofia in the area of counter-trafficking include:

Organizing multiple national counter trafficking information campaigns, educational

campaigns in schools, and outreach activities in vulnerable communities

Assisting with capacity building at national and regional levels in government and civil

society

Extending direct assistance to victims of trafficking (VOTs) by supporting the return and

reintegration of VOTs – 50 to 80 cases annually (15 to 30 cases annually after EU

accession); over 900 cases altogether

Assisting the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) with the development of the National

Mechanism for Consular Support of Bulgarian Nationals Abroad (an official internal

regulation of the MFA) in 2004

Supporting the development of the National Coordinated Mechanism for Return and

Assistance to Child Victims of Trafficking, which was officially adopted by the

Government of Bulgaria in 2005 and revised in 2010.

Donor: Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) through the Bulgarian Ministry

`55

of Interior

Immigration and Border Management/Integrated Border Management

A cooperation program aiming to build the capacity of the government in border management is

being implemented by IOM missions in Turkey, Greece and Bulgaria.

Donor: IPA

Labour and Facilitated Migration/Migrant Integration Programme

Under its migrant integration programme, IOM Sofia has established Integration Information

Migration Centers in key locations in Bulgaria which help migrants to successfully integrate into

Bulgarian society. It has also conducted integration information days within the country targeting

third country nationals residing legally in Bulgaria. A specialized integration website and

specialized integration hotline have also been established.

Donor EU Integration Fund, through the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs

Migration Health/Migration Health Programme

The EQUI HEALTH project aims to improve the access and quality of health services, health

promotion and prevention to meet the needs of migrants, the Roma and other vulnerable ethnic

minority groups, including irregular migrants residing in the European Union and European

Economic Area (EU/EEA). The three-year initiative was launched in February 2013 by the

Migration Health Division of IOM’s Regional Office for the European Economic Area in

Brussels.

CONCLUSIONSWhile the flow of refugees and irregular migrants into Europe is by no means a new

phenomenon, 2015 marked a huge and unexpected step up in the scale and nature of the refugee

movement problem and particularly so for the Balkan part of EU and the bordering countries

such as Turkey and FYROM. Bulgaria, Romania and Greece, were also hit by strong political

and economic crises, and unfortunately their health systems are below standards to meet

effectively their own citizens. Refugees, the human casualties streaming from the world’s trouble

spots are driven from their homelands by major crises such as war, religious and political

persecution, brutal regimes, ethnic cleansing, military uprisings and anarchy.

`56

The long-term physical and psychological sequelae resulting from this exposure are common

features of the ‘refugee diverse experience’. Very few emerge from their experiences without

having endured or witnessed some form of physical or psychological trauma. Some refugees,

such as those from Syria, have endured years of warfare. Others from Afghanistan, have suffered

internal displacement or repression within their own countries for long periods. It is estimated

that 40 percent of refugees have experienced severe trauma, such as witnessing killings – often

of their own family members. Many have survived detention, physical violence, rape and

perilous journeys to countries of asylum, only to endure a hand-to-mouth existence in

dangerous overcrowded camps or urban refugee environments. Many refugees experience long

and dangerous journeys to their countries of asylum. On arrival most are put into camps where

conditions range from substandard to appalling. Some refugees have languished in camps for

more than 10 years. Many refugee children currently in Bulgaria were born in the refugee camps

and have no other life experience.

The healthcare, political and economic context of the refugee movements and migration in

Bulgaria and elsewhere needs more than simple knowledge on it. It requires additional support –

language specialists, mediators, health facilitators. The interviews conducted and the best

practices investigated from our team outline that dealing with migrants and migrants youth

effectively and including them calls for interdisciplinary teams, and stakeholders from various

fields, engaged in concrete actions – for improved primary and secondary healthcare of the

refugees.

Creativity, sports and arts power to integrate and accelerate migrants and youth migrants are still

unexploited in Bukgaria. Specific efforts and funding is needed for integrating them into larger

scale efficient campaigns – for health trainings and prevention of all – the refugees, the staff

working with them on the grounds, the experienced with vulnerable groups social service

providers, the businesses, and the citizens, and the refugees themselves, or the settled ones –

accelerating partnerships for implementing a successful HEALTH THREATS PREVENTION

STRATEGY in the regions most vulnerable from refugee influx, and considering the most

vulnerable groups of refugees and local citizens.

The NGOs and organizations working on the ground with refugees in Bulgaria /with both youth

and adults / are mainly focused with food, water, blankets supply and basic hygiene, thus they

`57

will always welcome the shared resources of local businesses, the local citizens hygiene

volunteers, the R leaders – facilitating immunization.

Health issues related to changes in lifestyle are emerging with the long-term settlement of

refugee communities. Reduced physical activity, diets high in fats and sugars, and smoking place

refugee groups, particularly those from South Asian, Middle Eastern and African groups, at risk

of cardiovascular disease, obesity and diabetes. Including refugee groups and their ethnic

communities in mainstream prevention, screening and intervention services and programmes is

of importance in maintaining good health outcomes for settled communities.

The Refugees from various regions tend to share common health problems, which have to be

addressed properly from the local communities. While some of the numbered problems affect

primarily the refugee own health, the infectious diseases, can cause damages – to the refugee

family, and all the other in contact. The refugees are often in the move, passing from country to

country, thus health threads are existent, not only to them, but also to the communities on their

road. No panic is needed rather improved competencies – of both the refugees and the local

communities, to understand better the health features of refugees, and establish efficient

mechanisms for prevention.

Lacking staff, finance and facilities, to deal with the refugee floods, the countries, partnering in

our project need urgent measures for securing human reception of the refugees and in

particular to provide primary healthcare to hotspots and refugee administration centers in

addition to humanitarian aid. The unprecedented movement of refugees found these hosting

countries not prepared to manage the Health Threads Risks to both the refugees and the

communities they meet on their route, or are settled with. Immediate are the needs for profound

understanding of the physical and mental status of the refugees, the healthcare services they are

familiar with underlying the health status of the people crossing seas, in order to survive.

Immediate is the need, the most vulnerable of them to be identified and URGENT Health Threads

Risks Strategy to be put into action, considering the specific features of the refugees.

The overcrowded hotspots in all the EU countries and in Bulgaria also, lack funds, facilities and

staff to deal alone with the refugee registration, thus SMART mobilization of resources, and

adapting the stakeholders’ expertise to the refugee basic needs, will make the EU response to the

crises much more efficient.

When exploring best practices we also realized that extensive, practical oriented knowledge on

`58

the EU TOP countries of refugees’ origin is needed. And it could be useful if it is transformed

into short and intensive trainings of well prepared interdisciplinary teams, so as to improve their

capacity to understand and apply effective preventive and subsequent healthcare service and

education – of the new and settled refugees and the stakeholders /including citizens/, mobilizing

resources from local, regional and national level.

SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS

Understanding the migrants and youth in particular specific needs is the first starting point in developing tools and methodologies for working with them the all young people who arrive in Bulgaria as refugees or with refugee-like experiences are likely to have experienced all or some of the following:

A dangerous escape from their country of origin, travelling long distances, often on foot. Living in unsafe and insecure environments for extended periods of time (e.g.

refugee camps, immigration detention or sometimes multiple transition countries) with limited or no access to health care, education, housing, income, social connection and sometimes food.

Extreme human loss (often unexplained), including the death or disappearance of family, friends, community members and loss of home, country and security.

Subjected to traumatic experiences including being victims of, or witnessing: torture, death, sexual assault, severe deprivation, and extended periods of fear and uncertainty.

Arbitrary and authoritarian treatment in relation to rights to food, water, mobility, safety, income, education and employment.

Disrupted family roles and relationships. Disrupted or very limited schooling.

Understanding the profound impact of trauma on the wellbeing of young people and their families is critical to good practice with young people from refugee backgrounds. Trauma can result in anxiety; sadness; a sense of having no control over your life; fear and lack of trust (amongst other responses)

While resettlement is a challenge for all new arrivals to Bulgaria, the resettlement needs of young people are different to those of adults because of the particular life stage of adolescence. Like all young people, those who arrive in Bulgaria between the ages of 12 and 25 years have hopes and aspirations for their future; are defining their personal identity and forming relationships outside their family and; are laying the foundations for the lives they will live as adults. These developmental tasks are compounded by cultural dislocation, loss of established social networks and the practical demands of resettlement process, and, for young people from refugee backgrounds, the traumatic nature of the refugee experience.Some specific challenges they may face include:

Learning a new language. Attending a mainstream school that does not respond to their particular needs. Lack of recognition of prior qualifications.

`59

Limited social capital to assist in accessing economic, educational and social resources, such as referees, networks for employment opportunities etc.

System issues, including confusion over birth dates, lost paperwork, or an inability to disclose information relating to family configurations and history.

Significant responsibilities in their family and community —young people are often the ‘front line’ in the settlement process, having to act as brokers (including interpreters) between services and systems and their parents and community members.

Surviving and challenging racism. Disillusionment and frustration (they had hoped for so much more)

Interviweing the EUROPEAN PRIORITIES NGO staff and managing board we spoke with them about the Migrant workers who came or settle in Bulgaria in search of jobs, usually in farming or domestic work. They face challenges that are not present for native workers. Many of them do not have the required paperwork to stay in the country legally, so they face the constant threat of deportation. The specific challenges this group faces are:

CoercionUndocumented migrant workers may not be willing to report a workplace injury because they are afraid of being reported to immigration authorities or losing their jobs and not being able to find another employer willing to take them on. Some workers are promised jobs to entice them to come to Bulgaria , but are not given the same type of job when they arrive. Sexual or physical assault incidents are also underreported in the migrant worker population because of the fear of consequences.

Lack of BenefitsBecause they are often paid in cash off the books, migrant workers are not eligible for company benefits such as pensions and insurance plans. They also miss out on unemployment, disability and Social Security benefits from the government. Breaks, overtime, sick pay and minimum wage laws may not be followed because there is no recourse for the worker.

Dangerous ConditionsWorkers may be housed in unsanitary conditions, which are especially dangerous for children. If the company provides food for its employees, it is often low quality and not very nutritious. With many families living together in the same facility, important items such as showers, ovens and toilets may break down. Migrant workers are also subject to harsh conditions on the job, such as working in extreme weather for long hours with no breaks.

Cultural DifferencesCultural differences present problems for migrant workers even when they are away from the job site. Local residents may discriminate or resent migrant workers for taking the available jobs in the area. Migrant workers are often isolated from their neighbors because they do not speak the language and shop mostly at ethnic stores. The language barrier can also make it difficult to understand legal documents such as leases and tax forms.

Educational IssuesChildren of migrant workers often miss school and fall behind their peers because they have to

`60

work along with the rest of the family. Child labor laws are typically not enforced among the migrant population, so there is no protection for the children. Even when the child does not perform any actual work, he may spend the day at the job site with his parents because there is no available daycare. Families tend to move according to the seasons, which makes it even more difficult for the children to keep up in school.

“Building trust. That is my priority when working with young migrants or refugees. It happens though careful listening… respect. Work to understand each individual’s unique experience through careful and respectful listening. Learn about the young person’s culture, be curious and take direction from the client. If they wish and in their time, listen to their story, hear about who they are and bear witness to their extraordinary experiences. Don’t expect to get all the answers straight away. Be prepared to take time to build relationships - be patient, and listen rather than focusing on completing forms.” /VESELINA HRISTOVA, social care expert at BDSFL and Veritas NGO, with over 5 years of youth work experience/. “Forget about old counseling one-to-one models… be creative and interactive. Counseling often takes place informally .. Lead and guide …smooth the young people path and innovate… this is the only way to reach human hearts “ Professor Dimitar Damyanov /managing board and professor in EUROPEAN PRIORITIES NGO/

“Share and offer gestures of hospitality. … Take a cup of tea or chocolate, try traditional food, homemade recipe, attend communities fests and celebrations, listen to the songs and dances …join them. We are so common… learning and respecting foreign cultures is great journey and can meet you with fantastic people. “/Soslan Koakev, member of the managing board and youth worker at VERITAS NGO/.

“Family connections… are unique and very important. Wherever you can …help the young people connect, speak, learn about their family. Support them with communication, provide them ICT access, be creative and find stakeholders. Help the young migrants stay informed and engage in community family celebrations and events.”/Anka Shtereva, member of the managing board and youth worker at VERITAS NGO/.INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED

METHODOLOGY

TOTAL NUMBER 10 SEMI STRUCTUREDWORK VISITS 6 OPEN AND CLOSED

QUESTIONSON-LINE INTERVIEWS 4 LANGUAGE – LOCAL –

BULGARIANSOCIAL WORKERS AVERAGE AGE

25-38

KEY CONCLUSIONS OF NATIONAL REPORTContemporary European societies have been recently characterized as having entered the age of 'super-diversity'. Migratory flows in particular have contributed to this transformation, due to

`61

the heterogeneous ethno-cultural, and religious background of present migrants, as well as their social status, age, and mobility patterns. Among the effects this transformation has brought about is the increased challenge posed to the constitutive principle of the nation-state, i.e., the assumption that identity (nation) and politics (state) can and should be mutually constituent and spatially congruent. Thus, unsurprisingly, many states have started perceiving diversity as a 'problem', potentially threatening national unity, while anti-immigration and xenophobic attitudes have experienced a rapid surge.After the mid-1970s, Europe began and continues to experience integration problems. The different aspects of the impact of migration on social structures include 1) improvement of the housing situation for foreigners, 2) teaching migrants the language of the receiving country, 3) solving the unemployment problem of unskilled migrants, 4) improvement of educational and vocational qualifications of 2nd generation migrants, 5) development of programs to help unemployed wives of migrants to learn the language and meet indigenous women, 6) encouraging migrants to maintain their cultural identity and assisting them with reintegration if they return to their original country, 7) coping with the problems of refugees, and 8) solving the problems of illegal migration. Almost all receiving countries now severely restrict further immigration. [Those policies should result in improved development of aid policies towards sending countries. Immigration from other countries to those of the European Economic community should be limited to that for humanitarian reasons.

The research involved semi structured interviews and work visits to youth workers with vast practical fieldwork experience. Considering the outlined key challenges met by young migrants outlined by local and regional research and confirmed by the interviewed youth workers, we consider that all materials developed during the project must consider and reflect on:

IMPACT OF REFUGEE EXPERIENCE to all migrants Settlement and Resettlement challenge to young migrants An intercultural approach to youth work requires the involvement and

participation of young people from the cultural and ethnic groups living in the local community as much as possible. Outreach to new communities is essential, and a traditional ‘open-door’ policy may not work. Consultation with young people in the area ensures that the youth organisation is needs-based, and in the youth services, projects and clubs featured in this resource, an individual needs-assessment was often completed when new participants joined.

Young people from minority ethnic backgrounds attending youth organisation may initially prefer to engage with people of the same background or living in similar circumstances. This is understandable, but the aim of all youth work should be integration. You and your colleagues must decide how to approach this; how to set up activities and when to mix groups. Talk to the young people when planning this. Consider setting up a 'buddy' system, in groups of 4 rather than pairs, for young people of different backgrounds to work together. If your current group is quite ‘mono-cultural’, it can be beneficial to prepare them before introducing new members, and involve them in planning for this change. You should explore the needs, interests and own

`62

cultural awareness of your group. This will mitigate the potential for tension when faced with diversity. Young people may have dual or various 'identities', especially those of minority ethnic backgrounds; explore this in the group. It is important that every individual is encouraged to be aware of and proud of their own heritage and background.

Young people will be drawn to a youth organisation that offers activities which they are interested in. When working with young people from a minority ethnic background, the activities you offer can be especially important. Consult with the young people to see what they would like to do. Many minority ethnic parents will want to see their children doing activities which develop their life-skills and education, and young people themselves are often motivated by activities that develop their talents and abilities.

Identity work is important for all young people. Even if you don’t work with a group containing minority ethnic members, identity work should still take place, especially if you are planning on introducing newcomers to a group. Young Irish people may feel that they don’t have a ‘culture’. But feeling secure in your own cultural background is crucial for integration within society in general.

Youth workers are often unsure of whether an integrated or targeted approach is best when working with young people from a minority ethnic background. In the experience of the youth workers interviewed for this resource, it is important to work based on the needs and wants of the young people themselves.

Working with young males and females together can be a barrier for some ethnic and cultural groups.

When working with young people from a minority ethnic background, trying to find the right ‘terminology’ or what many regard as ‘politically correct’ can seem very difficult. When in doubt, it is best to ask the young people themselves. 

A peculiarity of the work with vulnerable groups of aliens who seek or have been granted protection is the need for the measures for their social adaptation and integration in society to be undertaken as soon as the status determination procedure has been initiated for them.

At this early stage, what is crucial is both the preparation of the employees who conduct the registration and the interviews with the asylum-seekers and their cooperation with the social workers, medical staff and psychologists at refugee centres.

The timely identification of asylum-seekers who have special needs allows undertaking specific measures for the protection and support of these individuals.

The general principle applied in working with individuals with special needs is based on the individual needs assessment in view of developing individual programs for social assistance, medical care, psychological assistance and counselling in order to restore the individual to his/her state of security, improve his/her physical and mental health, and regain the confidence in his/her forces and capacity.

While legislative and practical measures have been undertaken in respect of the work

`63

with unaccompanied minor and juvenile aliens who seek or have been granted protection, the issue regarding the appointment of a guardian or a tutor has not yet been solved. The legal representation by the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee during the status determination procedure is of key importance in a number of cases – the choice of a GP, the provision of appropriate nutrition, the access to the educational system, upbringing, control, etc.

There is no practice in relation to placing unaccompanied minor refugees with foster families. This is due to the relatively new legislation and practice in this area in the Republic of Bulgaria. The requirements with regard to the selection of foster families are extremely high, while the aid granted does not conform to the care these families are required to take.

The placement of unaccompanied minor refugees at the Registration-and-Reception Centre for Refugees in the village of Banya, Nova Zagora Municipality, ensures, to some extent, the provision of initial accommodation and care for these children. In order to meet the requirements in terms of providing social services to children, the activity of the Centre has to undergo a comprehensive change.

There is no unified information database for unaccompanied minor refugees, which would allow monitoring the situation of each child from registration, throughout the status determination procedure, to the accommodation in specialized institutions, the measures provided for social protection, as well as subsequent integration in the Bulgarian society.

The marginalization of and societal intolerance towards the Romani minority remained the country’s most pressing human rights problem. A growing societal intolerance to refugees and continued deterioration of the media environment due to corporate and political dependence were also problematic.Sixty-two per cent of Bulgarians see immigration as the most important issue facing the

European Union while 42 per cent see terrorism as the biggest issue facing the bloc, the latest

regular survey by Eurobarometer has found.

While 61 per cent of Bulgarians have a positive attitude to migration from elsewhere in the EU,

77 per cent have a negative attitude to migration by non-EU citizens.

This negative attitude to migration by non-EU nationals has grown by five points since

Eurobarometer’s spring 2016 survey.

Bulgarians, while seeing immigration and terrorism as the most important issues facing the EU,

with the economic situation in third place at 12 per cent, had different priorities when it came to

their own country, the Eurobarometer poll found.

The most important issues facing Bulgaria were unemployment (30 per cent), immigration (29

per cent) and the economic situation (30 per cent), according to the survey, which allowed

respondents to choose two issues out of a number of options.

The Eurobarometer survey found that, at a personal level – as opposed to a national level-

`64

Bulgarians saw the main issues facing them as rising prices, inflation and cost of living (30 per

cent), health and social security (20 per cent) and pensions (21 per cent).

Just less than half of Bulgarians – 49 per cent – had a positive image of the EU, a drop of two

points compared with the spring 2016 Eurobarometer survey. Thirty-three per cent had a neutral

image, a gain of three points, and 16 per cent had a “totally negative” image of the EU, a drop of

one point since the previous survey.

At the same time, 55 per cent of Bulgarians were optimistic about the future of the EU, though

this was a drop of three points since the spring.

Eighty-seven per cent of Bulgarians favoured free movement of goods, persons and services, five

per cent were against and eight per cent answered “don’t know”.

Fifty per cent of Bulgarians opposed the euro, the bloc’s common currency. Bulgarians, who

currency is the lev (pegged to the euro by a currency board arrangement) were 38 per cent for,

while 12 per cent answered “don’t know”.

The Eurobarometer survey was done between November 3 and 16 2016, in the 28 member

countries of the EU and the five candidate countries.

The newest survey found that migration and terrorism remain by far the most important issues

facing the EU, according to respondents in the countries.

REFERENCES AND LINKS https://www.iom.int/countries/bulgaria - International organisation for migration/Country reports https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/humanrightsreport/index.htm?year=2016&dlid=265404#wrapper - Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2016 Bulgariahttps://ec.europa.eu/migrant-integration/intpract/iom-information-centers-for-immigrants-in-sofia-and-burgas - EUROPEAN WEBSITE OF INTEGRATION https://ec.europa.eu/migrant-integration/intpract/diversity-is-tasty-a-culinary-media-campaign-in-bulgaria - EUROPEAN WEBSITE OF INTEGRATION /Bulgaria/Diversity is tasteful https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12315893 /MEDLINE REPORTS Int Migr. 1989 Jun;27(2):209-16 Social effects of migration in receiving countriesThe European refugee crisis: Bulgaria’s wake-up call? /Alice Nicolov 23 September 2015

`65

https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/alice-nicolov/european-refugee-crisis-bulgaria%E2%80%99s-wake-up-callBulgarians see immigration as biggest issue facing EU, 77% oppose migration by non-EU nationals - EUROBAROMETER http://sofiaglobe.com/2016/12/22/bulgarians-see-immigration- as-biggest-issue-facing-eu-77-oppose-migration-by-non-eu-nationals/ http://www.intercultural.ie/content/step-5-involvement-youth - NATIONAL YOUTH COUNCIL IRELAND NATIONAL STATISTICAL INSTITUTE - http://www.nsi.bg/enPRACTICAL ASPECTS OF THE WORK WITH VULNERABLE GROUPS OF ALIENS WHO HAVE BEEN GRANTED REFUGEE STATUS OR HUMANITARIAN STATUS IN THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA - http://www.aref.government.bg/?cat=2 – REPORT – STATE AGENCY FOR REFUGEES BULGARIA

Innovative Techniques for Reaching Out to Migrant Youth Project

Contract number: 2016-2- ES02-KA205- 008204

`66

NATIONAL DESK RESEARCH

- ITALY-

for Intellectual Output 1:State of the art report on the Obstacles for Youth Work with Migrants

DESK RESEARCH1.1 DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT NATIONAL SITUATION

In 2013 there were 4,387,721 immigrants in Italy, 7.4% of the country’s population. The most numerous national groups were Romanians (21.2% of all immigrants), Albanians (10.6%), Moroccans (9.9%), Chinese nationals (4.6%) and Ukrainians (4.4%). Overall, about 14% were EU-nationals, while approximately 86% came from non-EU countries (Caritas Migrantes 2013).

In 2015, 153.842 immigrants landed in Italy. 16,362 of them were minor migrants (12,272 unaccompanied). Most of them came from Eritrea (3,089), Egypt (1,711), Somalia (1,296), Gambia (1,268) and Nigeria (1,006). The 2016 stands as a record year for two data: for the arrivals refugees (171.000) and unaccompanied foreign minors (20.000).The increase in the

`67

complexity of migration, due to highly dynamic causes given the nature of the migration flows, based on ever differing and changing reasons, is certainly outpacing the legislative measures aimed at regulating the phenomenon. The Italian Integration policies had mostly concentrated on economic integration until the 2000s4, whereas social and cultural policies remained marginal (Caponio and Zincone 2011). A shift towards a more cultural concept of integration first occurred in 2006, with the drafting of the Charter of the Values and Citizenship and Integration, and then in 2010, with the “Piano per l’integrazione nella sicurezza” (transl.: “Integration Plan”). Integration policies are implemented with money from the National Fund for the Social Policies, which is given to regions by the Ministry of Labour and Social Policies. The fund is allocated to regions to favour and improve social services, including those for the inclusion of immigrants. Nevertheless, from 2008 to today funds for social policies have been drastically reduced; those for the inclusion of immigrants have been eliminated. Another fund which was provided by the 2007 financial law, the Fund for social inclusion of immigrants, has never been implemented. Today funds for integration policies are mostly provided by the European Union (the AMIF Asylum Migration and Integration Fund). A new legislation on reception of asylum seekers was adopted in 2015 (Decree n. 142/15). In order to ensure an organic approach to the legislation and in accordance with Directive 2013/33/EU, the decree included the possibility of detention (previously not governed by European rules) as well as rules on initial reception in government centres. The new law tries to strength the current SPRAR (Central Service of the System for Protection of Asylum Seekers and Refugees). The reception system in Italy is based on several types of facilities: government reception centres, temporary facilities and the SPRAR network, which due to the different functions have also have different organizational models, cost breakdown and hosting times. The SPRAR System (Central Service of the System for Protection of Asylum Seekers and Refugees) consists of a structured network of local authorities (Ministries, Regions and Municipalities), which utilizes the National Fund for asylum services managed by the Ministry of the Interior in order to conduct local projects and reception activities due to asylum seekers and refugees. In 2014, reception in the SPRAR network was organized in 432 projects of which 349 for ordinary categories, 52 for unaccompanied minors, 31 for physically or mentally disabled persons. The projects involved 381 local authorities of which 342 municipalities, 31 provinces and 8 unions of municipalities. As for geographical distribution, the projects have covered 19 regions out of 20, and 93 provinces out of 110. The total number of reception places is 20,752 of which 19,514 for ordinary categories, 943 for unaccompanied minors, 295 for persons with mental or physical disability. CSOs, in particular social enterprises plays an important role in the management of SPRAR and all the integration services. It’s important to outline that in Italy 90% of the public welfare services are managed with public-private agreements, in our country - regardless of legal form - there are about 100,000 social enterprises involving more than 850,000 workers and 1.7 million volunteers. These organizations provide citizens with social and health services, but are also active in the areas of training and work placement, culture, sports, environment and research and are constantly expanding in other areas of general interest.Concerning the Unaccompanied foreign minors in Italy they are defined as “citizens of non-EU countries or stateless persons aged less than eighteen who enter the territory of Member States without being accompanied by an adult who is responsible for them in accordance with the law or customs, until they have come under the effective custody of a person responsible for them, or

4 http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/32019/INTERACT-RR-2014_05.pdf?sequence=1

`68

those minors who have been left without accompaniment once they have entered the territory of the Member States”. However, despite a highly protective legislative framework, considering that all the forms of protection laid down for Italian minors also apply to foreign minors, their considerable presence in our country raises a number of problems for the various institutional and other actor, especially with regard to the social services system with their task of implementing the legal safeguarding provisions with a concrete network and social. First of all, we should consider that unaccompanied foreign minors are persons not subject to expulsion on the basis of national and international laws that recognize and protect their vulnerability. In 1991, Italy did, in fact, ratify the UN Convention on the rights of children (Law n. 176 of 27 May 1991), introducing into the Italian legal system the full recognition of the specific nature of the status of being minors, and adopting the principle by which the superior interest of minors must be considered as prevalent. Anyway this actions are not enough to guarantee the child protection: after one year, at registration and first reception, clear guidance and qualified staff to identify children at risk continue to be often missing; age assessment procedures have generally not been applied at first reception facilities (particularly in transit countries), nor have they been adequately explained to children; delays persist in the appointment of guardians, in some cases for several months thus delaying children’s access to protection, adequate reception and family reunification. In Italy, studies on the children of immigrants are still few and there is a lack of more comprehensive research (in terms of both longitudinal and/or transversal designs) to further understand the condition of adolescent foreigners. The scientific literature concerning young migrants is quite recent, and it’s focuses mainly upon young immigrant students . From the first seminal book published in 1996 concerning in Italian school system (Giovannini, 1996) up to today, many researchers have focused on young immigrants in institutional perspective. Migrant Youth– whether they arrived as the result of a family rejoinder or were born in the receiving country – represent a group which has become visible and has grown rapidly since the turn of the last century5. According to the Istat (the Italian national statistics agency), on Jan 1st 2015 the number of foreign minors resident in Italy amounted to 950,000. What emerges is the consolidation of a type of immigration characterized by the prevalence of families with children, who increasingly tend to come in contact with schools and educational institutions. Data from the Italian Ministry of Education reveal that the number of immigrant students enrolled in school is approximately 900,000, about 9% of total students. These students correspond to a heterogeneous universe in terms of the many different nationalities represented (almost 200), the diversified migratory experience, level and type of school attended and territorial distribution. This situation has largely prevented Italian society and institutions from undertaking a concrete and proactive policy at all levels (national, regional and local). One of the characteristic in Italy is the heterogeneity of immigrant’s population that become relevant if the young migrants’ origin is explored from an inclusion/exclusion processes perspective The range of possibilities varies per a variety of factors such as: families’ socio-economic situation, legal status and educational and working experiences. Images and description of young immigrants have been largely negative and mainly focused upon the idea that this social category will be always problematic. Young immigrants are often described as “delayed-blast social bombs” (Barbagli, 2002). There is always the image that young adult immigrants will create a continuous threat to Italian society but they are trebly disadvantaged: they are young, immigrants, and largely belong to the lower class. All these factors contribute to a negative stereotyping process. Queirolo Palmas (2006)

5 http://ijse.padovauniversitypress.it/system/files/papers/2010_1_2.pdf

`69

displays the dichotomous picture in the current Italian scientific and public debate: the young immigrant is ether a student with problems of integration (cognitive linguistic or social) or a social trouble-maker outside the protective schooling framework. But Bosisio et al (2005) exploring young immigrants from different origins, claim that in many circumstances, young subjects of immigrant origin have more resources in comparison to their Italian counterparts. They are often able to cope with diversity better than Italians, they can move in and through social and cultural spaces that differ from their origins. Young adult immigrants often experience a shift in terms of opportunities and chance to obtain what they deserve in comparison to their Italian counterparts. In this perspective they are considered: -  a “strategic generation”, whose project is developed on the basis of available resources and life conditions, but who are also challenging preordained patterns and destinies and developing unusual strategies towards inclusion, assimilation, and the multiple belongings; -  a “transitional generation”, who is facing the difficult shift from the familial immigration project to a consolidation in the country of arrival, thus challenging both parents’ aspirations and the host society’s capacity for reception. The results achieved by this generation, in terms of social inclusion, will undoubtedly determine the condition of future generations.

GOOD PRACTICES

“Emergenze Sostenibili” (Sustainable Emergencies) project lead by SISTEMA IMPRESE SOCIALI (SIS): Emergenze sostenibili defines an emergency plan for the resettlement and the integration of unaccompanied migrant minors aged 16-18 yrs. The governance is public-private partnership: Public Administration with the emergency services “Prompt Intervention”, the Third Sector that has aggregated 6 ATS united organizations (Associations Purpose Temporary), with a total network of 12 agencies. The project is based on two operative units and one for the monitoring and coordination. The two operative units have the role in design the socio-educational interventions, legal assistance procedures and creation of the formal and informal network to answer the unaccompanied minors’ needs for housing, health, education and job placement.Project Data 2013-15: 431 unaccompanied minors hosted during the three years fromEgypt, Albania, Bangladesh, Kosovo, Marocco, Senegal 240 basic education plans delivered, secondary education plan delivered, 206 vocational education realized. 143 migrant minors have been involved in apprenticeship (work based education education) programs in different working sector (food service, bakery, distribution chain, gardening and agriculture, construction, personal care services, mechanic sector).This project is leaded by SIS developed with regional and national funds since 2012 and coordinate by ministry of welfare and co-planning and co-management (including public and private entities for the construction of public policies) One of the elements is to prefer small centres spread in the city. In many small centres, widespread in the territory are implemented two types of assistance: a first reception shelter that provides a taking charge of up to three months; and a second type of reception provides a help for the young foreigners to be independent, phase that lasts up to adulthood. A team of multi professionals supervises the young migrants: social workers, educators, mediators and psychologists. This to enforce the fundamental rights and the protection of unaccompanied foreign minor: child protection, rules of coexistence, literacy courses - education and integration in the city and job placement.

`70

Dance Workshop: this good practice took place in 2011, in Padova, a city in northern Italy of about 211.560 inhabitants. In the last thirty years, the area has changed from an emigration territory to a palace of immigration. Currently 10% of the resident population are foreigners (predominantly from Romania, Moldavia, Albania and the Maghreb region). The project took place in a dance laboratory, to serve the aim of raising awareness on gender in multicultural society through dance. The project was based on the idea that many young women in the Muslim minority might have little access to discos and dance courses for many reasons, including body performance, ‘inappropriate’ dress code (tiny tutu costumes used in classical and contemporary dance classes), late opening hours of discos, etc. Therefore, the project aimed to allocate a space for (primarily) Muslim girls and their non- Muslim peers, in which they could give and receive dance lessons, express their artistic talents, feel comfortable to dance in a safe environment and break down stereotypes. It was not an easy task to find a suitable venue in terms of rental costs, comfortable space and accessibility by public transport. In the end, the project was hosted in a gym belonging to an old school of the city. The use of dance was successful to develop intercultural competence by exchanging and learning different dancing styles, for example belly dancing, hip hop, flamenco, afro-dance and tarantella; to strengthen networking among young women with very different backgrounds (conservative, emancipated, atheist, religious, Italian girls with and without migration background, citizens and non-citizens, married and unmarried and so on).

CONCLUSIONSIn Italy immigration has always been considered a problem or even an emergency. At the core of political and public attention there is usually the issue of illegal migration, and particularly the arrival of African migrants at Lampedusa. So, whereas, immigration policy is usually linked with issues of security, illegality and crime, integration is never at the core of public and political discourses. It is not a central political priority for politicians and governments. On the contrary, integration has always been conceived as a de facto process, which occurs through participation in the labour market: integration has been seen as related to, or at least as a consequence of, economic insertion (Caponio 2013). Since the early 1990s in Italy a limited number of empirical studies have been carried out on the processes of social inclusion among immigrant youths. At the turn of millennium, however, we are still only at the very beginning. All these pioneer studies focus on the central role played by school integration as the main tool for future social inclusion and on the value of school success in determining ascending mobility for second generation immigrants. Nowadays we know that Integration goes beyond having a high school rate or a job. Active participation in other aspects of society is equally important, in particular in educational activities and social activities, including for children. Not only does this contribute to the smooth integration of third-country nationals, it also helps to promote a positive image of migration, combat stereotypes, communicate real facts and change the ‘narrative’ on migration. Integration is a result of third country nationals’ participation in educational and social activities, cultural life, the volunteering sector, media professions, decision-making/consultation and representation frameworks.In the system of assistance to unaccompanied foreign minors, we have identified critical elements. There is a lack of national law that uniforms treatment and the rights of unaccompanied minors; actually there are many differences in local procedures. The Juvenile Court needs to define the legal protection of unaccompanied foreign minors, which takes too long and often minors become adult during the process. Besides, the number of beds offered is

`71

less than the need, and many children are accepted in adult centres. Last, the protection ends with the adulthood and the institutions cannot follow these people in the later stages. The common goal is to encourage every single person in the re-conquest of personal autonomy and emancipation from want the same reception, starting with the most vulnerable, including unaccompanied minors, who, between 2014 and the early months 2015, reported a too long timing in launching the host system dedicated to it, remaining in many cases without adequate solutions.In Conclusion from our point of view we can affirm that individuals, families and ethnic groups actively cultivate multiple belongings, which is an alternative form of integration that entails multiple memberships (national, transnational, cultural, religious, professional, and linguistic) that do not coexist in contrast with one another but rather are partially overlapping. This vision seems to fit the pluralistic and fragmented nature of receiving societies, which offer, at one and the same time, a wealth of opportunities and pose serious threats to successful integration. It also demonstrates that there is an ample space in society where individuals can elaborate, work through and re-formulate their identities in order to choose who to be and how to participate in the social life of the host country. In other words, migrant persons (and young immigrants in particular) can be active in the construction of their group memberships (Santelli, 2003) and demonstrate agency in the process of shaping their lives.

SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWSSOCIAL WORKER INTERVIEWED

Name and surname Age Years of experience in the field of youth

Organization

 Luana Catanzaro 31 2 SAS –Spazio Aperto Servizi  Social Enterprise Davide Caselli 35 3  SAS –Spazio Aperto Servizi  Social Enterprise Giuseppe Di Grigoli 32 2  SAS –Spazio Aperto Servizi  Social Enterprise Alberto Bazzoli 27 2  SAS –Spazio Aperto Servizi  Social Enterprise Stefania Maroso 30 3  SAS –Spazio Aperto Servizi  Social Enterprise Andrea Mineo 28 5 Farsi Prossimo – Social Enterprise Riccardo Meloni 31 1,5 Lo Scrigno – Social EnterpriseBarbara Gullo 34 7 Azione Solidale – Social EnterprisePaola Pezzenati 42 15 Tuttininsieme Social EnterpriseAntonio Perez 33 4 Tuttinsieme Social EnterpriseTeresa Barone 32 4 Tuttinsieme Social EnterpriseLuca Maiorano 28 2 Tuttinsieme Social EnterpriseHeba Hibraim 33 4 Tuttinsieme Social Enterprise

According to the Interviews we have realized the key-figure of the obstacles of working with migrant youth are:

First Approach: overcome the initial suspicion that unaccompanied migrant minors show, they often think of not being understood in behavior, which are the cultural expression of the family of origin. Intercultural Communication Skills: not to talk the same language is the first obstacle of integration and successful learning outcomes. Discrimination: stereotypes and discrimination are present in different level of the society, and it affect the socio-educational intervention, and relation between social workers-migrant minors. School Institutions are often not prepared and they pretend from the Third Nationals families the same support from the National ones.

`72

Reduction of the authonomy status: The unaccompanied foreign minors are not placed in a structured path toward autonomy that continues once they come of age. There is no clear and effective legislation. The perception that they have of themselves is wounded, in their countries of origin are mostly considered as adults, while in our European countries are placed under protection and they are prohibited activities (such as work) that they practiced for many years; The lack of ID documents creates difficulties entering the boys in mixed original contexts, for example sporting contexts, to promote integration. Few educational settings for free and spontaneous access, where kids can meet and interact with like different origins. Lack of Knowledge of the cultural context of origin and of the household is crucial, but often lack the tools and training. You should design and create moments of knowledge and information sharing between educators and families, the lack of financial resources does not allow this engagement work. Migrant Youth often congregate under the same cultural background of origin. This generates lock and distrust of the outside world. The educational work should aim to undermine these mechanisms, to encourage integration.

Key figure of the opportunities and need in the field of work with migrant youth targeting unaccompanied migrant minors and second generation of third nationals youth.According to the youth workers we have interviewed the NON FORMAL EDUCATION approach is the powerful one to overcome the language and cultural barriers, but it is not yet enough widespread in residential and temporary services for migrant youth, including in school and out of school programs. In particular, the interviewees declare that non formal education methodologies is limited also in the University’ Curriculum for social workers and educators Degree. Another aspect that affect this phenomenon is the non-formal education requires specific skills like drama, music, sport, art, media experiences.

LACK IN THE USE OF ARTS AS THERAPHY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION TOOLS: professional profile expert in the use of art with therapeutic approach or social-inclusion approach are rare and expensive, not well recognized by the rules applied in education, protection and welfare system.

LACK OF INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE/DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT SKILLS: social workers often are not specialized in intercultural dialogue and knowledge of the religious aspects of the country of origins. Policies and services related the reception and integration od migrant youth are not planned with a diversity management approach.

NEED TO FOSTER SPORT AS TOOL OF SOCIAL INTEGRATION such as capoeira, hip pop, football, basket.

STRENGHTEN THE USE OF ICT and GAMINFICATION: to empower the learning outcomes of migrants youth newly arrived, such as the Second language.

PROMOTE THE USE OF MEDIA and STORYTELLING: Activation of a web radio, story telling activities, citizens journalism let migrant youth to become more aware of the reality in which they live, and to acquire active citizenship attitude.

“An obstacle to the work with migrants is certainly represented by the "wall" inevitable mistrust

`73

and prejudice that permeates the first contacts between users and operators. Understand each other and know each other is a process that takes time and energy to the relationship. The opportunities that arise immediately, passed the "wall", are characterized by complementary visions and creative approaches to problem solving and the development of new activities and services” (Barbara Gullo, social worker in a municipal youth centre managed by Azione Solidale Social Enterprise)

“There are two boys who attend the "homework workshop" and they are hosted in a protect shelter for foreign unaccompanied minors. The first obstacle with them is the suspicion, they do not speak Italians and they watch at you. They do not interact with anyone. The Language generates an initial distance. But if we let them time to feel in a safe and secure environment, they become able to communicate in different ways. (Riccardo, social worker in municipal youth center, managed by Lo Scrigno Social Enterprise).

KEY CONCLUSIONS OF NATIONAL REPORT The chances for social integration open to immigrant second generations and unaccompanied minors newly arrived represent a crucial aspect for the interpretation of multi-ethnic societies. Unlike the issue of integration of adult immigrants, the condition of young people presents several complexities: it represents “a turning point in inter-ethnic relations, pointing to a general acknowledgment that an irreversible change is occurring within the human and social geography of multicultural countries” (Ambrosini, 2009). Integration is not a self-evident concept; on the contrary, it requires a clear rationale and an adequate contextualization to be used as a powerful category of analysis. For instance, the issue of young immigrant’s integration is strictly linked to the problem of identity, which underscores the existing connection between the collective and the individual dimension in adolescent development: at this age, the more individuals feel at ease with their own identity, the greater their chances of exploiting all the routes to integration in society. The identity of immigrants is also a crucial issue in determining good living relations among different peoples in a multicultural society, both in the present and in the future. Peaceful cooperation among members of the same community entails the establishment of spontaneous interaction on both sides, in terms of needs and aspirations. The term “integration” evokes a wide range of related concepts in its stride: acculturation, inclusion, embeddings, and the more consistent idea of belonging, that is, taking part in, or feeling that one is part of, a given context/environment. The issue at stake here is exactly to distinguish the different ways to construct and negotiate such a sense of belonging. Traditionally, immigrants became full members of their receiving society as a result of assimilation. This was a process that implied the relinquishment of a part of their dimension of “otherness” and an acquiescence to acquire some of the characteristics and traits of the majority. This assimilative model, however, has begun to show its weaknesses, for several reasons: firstly, because it is impracticable for individuals to ignore and abandon their previews identities; secondly, because in post-modern society individuals no longer encounter social contexts which are culturally uniform or cohesive, but rather social environments that tend to be pluralistic (Grillo, 1998). According to the interviews we have realized and our perspective as social cares services providers, we believe that the pluralistic model of integration can be achieved with strong social cohesion policies and a full recognition of the “power” of non-formal learning. Cooperation between formal and non-formal learning institutions affects both parties. When education offers

`74

learning situations where the learners are able to activate their preconceptions, experiences and knowledge, the learning processes are a link between people’s background experiences and the demands set by the curricula. From the viewpoint of formal education, this means informalisation. Pedagogical methods are changing. New ideas such as work-based learning, place-based ed- ucation or the use of social media all contribute to reorganising pedagogical practices inside formal institutions. Emphasis on the recognition of prior learning and portfolios also means that the content of formal learning takes into account both informal and non-formal learning. From the viewpoint of non-formal learning this means, however, formalisation. Recognising prior learning may require non-formal institutions to give diplomas, explicate learning situations and prepare learners for skill demonstrations. Together the simultaneous processes of formalisation and informalisation mean that the landscape of education becomes more blurred, convergent and connected.

REFERENCES AND LINKS Italian Ministry of Interior (2015), Study Group on the reception system, Report on the reception of mi-grants and refugees in Italy:Aspects, procedures, problems.

Maddalena Colombo , Mariagrazia Santagati (2013) Interpreting social inclusion of young immigrants in Italy, Padova University Press.

Caritas Migrantes (2013), Rapporto statitstico sull’immigrazione. IDOS edizioni.

Ambrosi E., Rosina A. (2009). Non e un paese per giovani. L’anomalia italiana: una generazione senza voce. Venezia: Marsilio.

Besozzi E. (edited by) (2005), I progetti di educazione interculturale in Lombardia. Dal monitoraggio alle buone pratiche, Fondazione Ismu, Regione Lombardia, Osservatorio Regionale per l’integrazione e la multietnicità, Milano.

Bosisio R., Colombo E., Leonini L., Rebughini P. (eds.) (2005). Stranieri & Italiani. Una ricerca fra gli adolescenti figli di immigrati nelle scuole superiori. Bari: Donzelli.

Grillo R. D., Pratt J. (eds.) (2002). The politics of recognizing difference. Multiculturalism Italian-style. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Alushi A. (2015), Uguali ma diversi: pari opportunità per le seconde generazioni nel sistema di IeFP, Graduation Thesis, Università degli Studi di Milano Bicocca.

Italian Ministry of Interior, SPRAR network (Central Service of the System for Protection of Asylum Seekers and Refugees). - http://www.sprar.it

National Web Portal for immigrant integration policies and services- http://www.integrazionemigranti.gov.it/Pagine/default.aspx

Coalizione Italiana Libertà e Diritti Civili (CILD), open data on migration -http://openmigration.org

`75

Piano Accoglienza, 2016 (Reception Plan 2016)- www.vita.it/attachment/d601c9b0-b314-46ba-b708-d4341546c2d9/

Rapporto Minori Stranieri Non Accompagnati (MSNA), 2016, (Report on Unaccompanied foreign minors)- http://viedifuga.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/2016-MSNA-Rapporto.pdf

DECRETO LEGISLATIVO 18 agosto 2015, n. 142 Attuazione della direttiva 2013/33/UE (law decree on reception and integration on refugees and asylum seekers )- http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2015/09/15/15G00158/sg

EMERGENZE SOSTENIBILI (sustainable emergencies) project, CONSORZIO SISTEMA IMPRESE SOCIALI - http://consorziosis.org/portfolio-items/emergenze-sostenibili/

`76